Accelerat ing t he world's research.

The buffering effects of CSR

reputation in times of product-harm
crisis
Chang Wan Woo
Corporate Communications: An International Journal

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Corporat e Communicat ions: An Int ernat ional Journal Towards a more dynamic st akeholder …
Тини Мартини

When CSR Meet s Mobile SNA Users in Mainland China: An Examinat ion of Grat ificat ions Sought , CSR M…
Yang Cheng

Do Et hics Mat t er? Invest igat ing Donor Responses t o Primary and Tert iary Et hical Violat ions
Taeyoung Kim, Young Eun Park, Nick Browning
 ISSN 1356-3289
Volume 24 Number 1 2019

Corporate
Communications
An International Journal

Published in association with

 Emerald Publishing Limited
Corporate Communications: An International Journal Howard House, Wagon Lane,
This international refereed journal addresses theory and practice arising from Bingley BD16 1WA, United Kingdom
awareness that corporate communication, as the name implies, lies at the heart of Tel +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201
effective strategic management, planning and control. The journal recognizes the E-mail emerald@emeraldinsight.com
impact that new digital media technologies are having on news management and
the monitoring and evaluation of corporate identity, organizational reputation and For more information about Emerald’s regional offices please go to
overall performance. Successful internal and external integration of corporate http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/offices
communication programmes involves all stakeholder groups and interested
parties. Corporate advertising, public and media relations go beyond the
Customer helpdesk:
gatekeeping functions of personnel development and marketing to embrace the Tel +44 (0) 1274 785278; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201
interdisciplinary, strategic framework of corporate communication. E-mail support@emeraldinsight.com
Orders, subscription and missing claims enquiries:
E-mail subscriptions@emeraldinsight.com
Tel +44 (0) 1274 777700; Fax +44 (0) 1274 785201
EDITOR
W. Timothy Coombs Missing issue claims will be fulfilled if claimed within six months of date of
despatch. Maximum of one claim per issue.
Texas A&M University, USA
Hard copy print backsets, back volumes and back issues of volumes prior
REGIONAL EDITORS to the current and previous year can be ordered from Periodical Service
Company.
NORTH AMERICA Tel +1 518 537 4700; E-mail psc@periodicals.com
Michael B. Goodman For further information go to www.periodicals.com/emerald.html
Corporate Communication International and Baruch College, Reprints and permissions service
City University of New York, USA For reprint and permission options please see the abstract page
AUSTRALASIA of the specific article in question on the Emerald web site
(www.emeraldinsight.com), and then click on the “Reprints and
Shaun Powell permissions” link. Or contact:
University of Wollongong, Australia E-mail permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Professor Shirley Leitch The Publisher and Editors cannot be held responsible for errors or any consequences
arising from the use of information contained in this journal; the views and opinions
University of Wollongong, Australia expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Publisher and Editors, neither does the
publication of advertisements constitute any endorsement by the Publisher and Editors
EUROPE of the products advertised.
Finn Frandsen No part of this journal may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any
Aarhus University, Denmark form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise
without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting
Dr Joep Cornelissen restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA
VRIJE Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the articles are those of
the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its
ASIA content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the articles’
Augustine Pang suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use.

Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Emerald is a trading name of Emerald Publishing Limited
Printed by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
BOOK REVIEW EDITOR
Chiara Valentini
Jyväskylä School of Business and Economics (JSBE), Finland

ISSN 1356-3289
© 2019 Emerald Publishing Limited

Guidelines for authors can be found at:

www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/ccij.htm

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

is indexed and abstracted in:
Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Management & Marketing
Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Psychology
EBSCO (Business Source Complete)
EBSCO Discovery Service
Emerald Management Reviews
e-psyche
Library and Information Science Abstracts
PsycINFO
Scopus
Zetoc (British Library)

Is ranked by:
The Publication Forum (Finland)
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Editorial
advisory
Temi Abimbola Michael Kent
Warwick Business School, UK University of Tennessee, USA board
Paul A. Argenti Eric Koper
Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, USA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria
Pekka Aula Juan Llopis
University of Helsinki, Finland University of Alicante, Spain
Ruth Avidar Alessandra Mazzei
1
University of Haifa, Israel IULM University, Italy
Barbara Baerns T.C. Melewar
Freie Universität Berlin, Germany Brunel University, UK
John M.T. Balmer Mette Morsing
Brunel University, UK Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Tom Bowers Judy Motion
Northern Kentucky University, USA University of New South Wales, Australia
Peggy Simcic Brønn Sandra Oliver
Norwegian School of Management, Norway University of West London, UK
Paul Capriotti Michael Palenchar
University Rovira i Virgili, Spain University of Tennessee, USA
Craig Carroll George G. Panigyrakis
New York University, USA
Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece
Lars Thøger Christensen
Roslyn Petelin
Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
University of Queensland, Australia
Timothy W. Coombs
Eastern Illinois University, USA Klement Podnar
University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Christine Daymon
Murdoch University, Australia Irene Pollach
Aarhus University, Denmark
Krishna S. Dhir
Campbell School of Business, Berry College, USA Johan van Rekom
Sabine Einwiller Erasmus University, The Netherlands
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany Juliet Roper
Wim J.L. Elving University of Waikato, New Zealand
Amsterdam School of Communications Research, University Alfonso Siano
of Amsterdam, The Netherlands University of Salerno, Italy
Maria Aparecida Ferrari Ramanjeet Singh
Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil Institute of Management and Technology, India
Karen Freberg Daniel So
University of Louisville, USA Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
Anne Gregory Erich Sommerfeldt
University of Huddersfield, UK University of Maryland, USA
Robert Heath Naral Tanyildizi
University of Houston, USA Firat University, Turkey
Sabrina Helm Maureen Taylor
University if Witten – Herdecke, Germany University of Tennessee, USA
Amir Hetsroni Petra Theunissen
Yezreel Valley College, Israel Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Lida Holtzhausen Dejan Verčič
North-West University, South Africa University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Pertti Hurme Edward T. Vieira, Jr
University of Jyvaskyla, Finland Simmons College, USA
Oyvind Ihlen Marita Vos
University of Oslo, Norway University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Laura Illia Mark van Vuuren
IE University, Spain University of Twente, The Netherlands
Winni Johansen Stefan Wehmeier
Aarhus Universitet, Denmark University of Southern Denmark, Denmark
Catrin Johansson
Gideon de Wet
Mid Sweden University, Sweden
University of Fort Hare, South Africa
Kim Johnston Corporate Communications: An
Queensland University of Technology, Australia International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
Jaemin Jung p. 1
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, r Emerald Publishing Limited
Korea 1356-3289

CCIJ
24,1
2 Evidence from an experimental study
Received 4 July 2018
Revised 12 November 2018
Accepted 12 November 2018
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 2-20
Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-07-2018-0071
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
Credible corporate social
responsibility (CSR)
communication predicts legitimacy
Irina Lock and Charlotte Schulz-Knappe
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR),
University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose – Companies in challenged industries such as fashion often struggle to communicate credibly with
their stakeholders about their social and environmental achievements. Credible corporate social responsibility
(CSR) communication, however, has been described theoretically as a predictor of legitimacy for organizations
in society, but never proven empirically. The purpose of this paper is to test perceived credibility of a CSR
website as a main predictor of input and output (pragmatic, cognitive and moral) legitimacy.
Design/methodology/approach – A 2 × 2 between-subjects online experiment with participants recruited
from the SoSci Panel (n ¼ 321) is conducted on an anonymized website of a fashion company.
Findings – Credible CSR websites result in output (cognitive and pragmatic) legitimacy. However, participation
in the CSR decision-making process (input or moral legitimacy) did not matter. Instead, the more subjects
accepted the outcome of the CSR communication process, the more they found a company to be legitimate.
Research limitations/implications – The CSR communication process on a website is just one specific
example. In other settings, such as social media, the role of participation in the CSR communication process
will be different.
Practical implications – Communicating credibly is a key, particularly in challenged industries, such as
fashion. Thus, designing credible communication material matters for legitimacy.
Originality/value – The findings for the first time confirm the credibility–legitimacy link in corporate
communication empirically. Participation in CSR-related decision-making processes is overrated: the outcome
of the CSR communication process is important for stakeholders and their acceptance of a company in society,
the participation in the process less. This confirms the idea of CSR as stakeholder expectations management.
Keywords Legitimacy, Corporate social responsibility, Credibility, Experiment, Website
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
At a time of decreasing public trust in organizations (Auger, 2014), assumptions of post-true
communication online (Heidbrink and Lorch, 2017) and rising critique on capitalism through
the financial crisis (Piketty, 2014), companies have an ever harder time to communicate with
stakeholders, particularly in shaken industries such as fashion and especially when it comes
to corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Waddock and Googins, 2011). The CSR
communication paradox marks a situation where more communication about CSR does
not result in more perceived transparency and trustworthiness, but on the contrary in more
skepticism. Thus, not the amount, but the perceived credibility of a company’s CSR
communication tools is key. Theoretically, the link between credible CSR communication as
a major part of corporate communication efforts (Cornelissen, 2014) and legitimacy is well
© Irina Lock and Charlotte Schulz-Knappe. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is
published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce,
distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-
commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms
of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
established (Seele and Lock, 2015), but we lack empirical proof that credible communication CSR
is in fact a predictor of legitimacy because experimental research is missing. communication
Legitimacy in corporate communication is often seen instrumentally, based on cognitive
and pragmatic legitimacy (Suchman, 1995; Etter et al., 2018). In CSR communication, the
normative concept of moral legitimacy has been emphasized, where legitimacy emerges from
a communication process that is oriented toward understanding between stakeholders and
organizations (Scherer and Palazzo, 2011). Thus, if an organization communicates credibly 3
about their social and environmental commitments, stakeholders grant it a “license to operate”
in society. To re- and maintain legitimacy, an organization needs to simultaneously manage all
three types (Scherer et al., 2013). This is particularly challenging in industries that suffered
from reputation losses after scandals such as the fast fashion business after the Rana Plaza
factory fire and reports on bad working conditions. Here, legitimacy can be re-gained through
communicating credibly about CSR progress (Seele and Lock, 2015).
However, while some studies have found positive effects of corporate credibility on
legitimacy ( Jahn et al., 2017; Bachmann and Ingenhoff, 2016), the credibility of the
communication tool has not been subject to testing and legitimacy has been studied in a
unidimensional fashion. In this context, no previous work has engaged with the credibility of
websites, which are one of the main channels of CSR communication (Du and Vieira, 2012).
Thus, legitimacy as an outcome of credible CSR communication is often claimed but barely
tested (Crane and Glozer, 2016). Given the rise and popularity of political-normative CSR theory
(Scherer and Palazzo, 2011) and its emphasis on participation based on deliberative democracy
theory (Habermas, 1996), we furthermore analyze in how far input (or moral) and output
legitimacy matter for organizational legitimacy. Thereby, this study attaches importance to all
three dimensions of legitimacy and tests them in one research design simultaneously.
To do so, a 2 × 2 between-subjects experiment with n ¼ 321 participants from the SoSci
Survey Panel confronts respondents with a real CSR website from an anonymized fashion
company. To manipulate participation in the CSR communication process and, thus,
approximate conditions of moral legitimacy, we followed an established experimental approach
from political sciences (Arnesen, 2017). One group “had a say” in the company’s decision
whether the website would be enriched with an additional CSR topic, the other group did not.
We also tested for cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy as outcome variables. The findings
confirm that the perceived credibility of a CSR website predicts cognitive and pragmatic
legitimacy. Interestingly, participants who could influence the company’s decision through their
vote did not find the company’s CSR decision more acceptable than those who did not “have a
say,” thus not confirming the hypothesized link between democratic participation in decisions
and attributed legitimacy to this decision. Instead, legitimacy was enhanced if the decision
matched the participant’s preference. Therefrom, we conclude that matching stakeholders’
expectations is a key for managing legitimacy, while stakeholder participation is not.

Literature review
Credibility in corporate and CSR communication
Gaining legitimacy from stakeholders has been described as the ultimate goal of corporate
communication efforts (Boyd, 2009; Waymer and Heath, 2014). A major strategy for re- and
maintaining the “license to operate” from publics is acting socially responsible and being a good
corporate citizen (Donaldson and Preston, 1995). Current CSR theories either of the functionalist,
political-normative or the constitutive views (Schultz et al., 2013) commonly rest on the
assumption that communication is key in a process of legitimation: within the instrumental
perspective, communication paves the way to effectively bring the CSR message across; in the
political-normative view, the responsibilities of corporations are considered political through
increased globalization and in consequence businesses need to resolve issues communicatively
and in a deliberative fashion with diverse stakeholders; or, in the constitutive view, CSR only
CCIJ comes into being in and through a communication process. Crane and Glozer (2016) have
24,1 recently identified four I’s of CSR communication that deserve further research, amongst which
CSR identity. Here, the researchers call for a better understanding of authentic CSR
communication and the outcomes of such communication on external stakeholders. In addition,
in their extensive review, they come to the conclusion that “legitimacy remains under-developed
relative to its potential, particularly in terms of its empirical operationalization” (p. 1243).
4 Viewing credible communication as a symbol of an authenticity process (Edwards, 2010), this
study tackles a pressing gap in CSR and CSR communication theory: the question in how far
credible communication can result in legitimacy perceptions.
Credibility is a multidimensional construct that marketing researchers have often
conceptualized as source-dependent (Keller and Aaker, 1992; Newell and Goldsmith, 2001;
Ohanian, 1991). An idea most prominent in corporate communication is to regard legitimacy as a
sub-category of trust (Bentele and Nothaft, 2011). Trustful relationships between organizations
and stakeholders are the cornerstone of organization–public relations (Heath et al., 2013;
Johansen and Ellerup Nielsen, 2011) and credible tools such as websites can be regarded as a
means to achieve them. Thus, an interaction-based credibility approach posits that credibility is
dependent on the communication tool, an idea included when measuring credibility in CSR
communication (Lock and Seele, 2017). Here, a piece of CSR communication is credible if it is
perceived as understandable, true, sincere and appropriate. Initially developed for CSR reports,
this measure can also be applied to online CSR communication tools, since the internet
has become the dominant communication channel for CSR initiatives (Fulton and Lee, 2013).
Thus, to result in legitimacy, CSR communication must be credible first, hence, if companies
communicate in a credible manner via their corporate communication tools and stakeholders
perceive this communication to be credible, they can establish legitimacy (Seele and Lock, 2015).
Corporate websites represent an important platform for companies, not only for selling
products, but also to support their image and maintain reputation (Da Giau et al., 2016).
Websites have predominantly been studied in terms of their potential for dialogue (Kent and
Taylor, 1998), consumers’ website attitudes (Chen and Wells, 1999), website performance
(Zeithaml et al., 2002) or satisfaction with the website (Bansal et al., 2004). A wide array of
research has analyzed CSR on corporate websites; Wanderley et al. (2008) analyzed whether
information disclosure on the websites of 127 corporations was influenced by country of
origin and/or industry sector. Tang et al. (2015) compared the CSR communications of 50 US
and 50 Chinese websites, while Capriotti and Moreno (2007) stretch the affordance of
interactivity of corporate websites. In the area of fashion, Da Giau et al. (2016) researched
which environmental and social sustainability practices companies in the Italian fashion
industry adopt and how they are communicated on their website. However, to date research
has not yet investigated websites in terms of their perceived credibility, which is
particularly intriguing to study as credible communication can be seen as a predictor of
legitimacy (Lock and Seele, 2017).
It is exactly in industries such as fashion that companies face communication challenges
and are confronted with legitimacy gaps (Shim and Yang, 2016): stakeholders challenge
companies’ license to operate because of past scandals or misconduct (Luoma-aho and Vos,
2010). Du and Vieira (2012) explain that controversial industries “may be polemic owing to the
goods or services that they provide and/or how they conduct themselves in the process of
achieving business objectives” (p. 413). Thus, either industries are considered controversial
due to their products or services. Tobacco or alcohol resemble such products as they are by
social standards considered sinful, detrimental to health and potentially addictive (Fooks et al.,
2011; Du and Vieira, 2012; Cai et al., 2012). Or, industries are seen as controversial when known
for participating in socially or environmentally irresponsible business practices or corrupt and
unethical behaviors. The oil industry is widely associated with environmental disasters, such
as the Exxon Valdez and BP oil spills. Further, it is also perceived to be guilty of negative
social and environmental consequences, such as human rights abuses and neglect of labor and CSR
safety standards as well as high CO2 emissions and the deterioration of water caused by oil communication
production (Woolfson and Beck, 2005).
The (fast) fashion industry resembles a controversial industry because of unsustainable
practices within its complex supply chains (Arrigo, 2013). From an environmental
perspective, the production processes involve the use of chemical substances posing a threat
to the safety of local water and the global transportation of goods resembles an issue in 5
terms of CO2 emissions (Seuring and Müller, 2008; Caniato et al., 2012; Fletcher, 2013).
From a social perspective, it is associated with unethical working conditions and human
rights violations (Seuring and Müller, 2008; Arrigo, 2013). In 2013, public pressure increased
when the building of a clothing factory collapsed in Bangladesh. Thus, fashion companies
are subject to sustainability pressures and attacks by NGOs and the public and are,
therefore, especially forced to engage in CSR communication (Pedersen and Andersen, 2015).
Thus, re-and maintaining legitimacy in such a sector is a challenge, particularly because
of the high scepticism associated with the CSR communication from these companies
(Du and Viera, 2012). But, since this industry is present in everyday life, it sets the proper
stage for researching the credibility–legitimacy nexus.

Researching the credibility–legitimacy link

Legitimacy is central to the understanding of organization–public relationships (Heath et al.,
2013; Wæraas, 2018), but barely inquired empirically in corporate communication
( Jahn et al., 2017; Bachmann and Ingenhoff, 2016). In neighboring disciplines to corporate
communication, most dominantly business management or organizational communication,
lots of research have looked at legitimacy and CSR from a qualitative perspective (e.g. Castelló
and Lozano, 2011; Golant and Sillince, 2007; Reast et al., 2013; Berry, 2017). However,
legitimacy has barely been studied quantitatively as an outcome variable in the context of
CSR communication (Crane and Glozer, 2016), and never with regard to credibility.
Past studies have measured legitimacy through the lens of accreditation or firm survival
(Ruef and Scott, 1998), in perception surveys (Massey, 2001; Chung et al., 2016), through
media coverage (e.g. Deephouse and Carter, 2005), or semantically based on the assumption
that positive expressions by stakeholders about a firm are a proxy for legitimacy
(Etter et al., 2018). Experimental approaches to measuring legitimacy have been conducted
predominantly in the political sciences and social psychology (Arnesen, 2017).
Different types of legitimacy have been differentiated in the literature. Industry legitimacy
refers to the idea that entire industries can jeopardize their license to operate in society when
their business practice or products have undergone major misconducts, such as the banking
industry after the financial crisis or the tobacco sector (Fooks et al., 2013). An issue, on the
other hand, is legitimate if the public perceives it as a public concern (Coombs, 1992).
Corporate communication researchers have suggested actional legitimacy to look at micro
processes and to study specific issue management situations (Boyd, 2009). In the political
sciences, decision legitimacy is studied in relation to elections or decisions reached through
deliberation (Parkinson, 2003). This is also where the notion of input and output legitimacy
originates back from thinkers such as Max Weber (Wæraas, 2018): input legitimacy refers to
participation in a decision-making process, output legitimacy looks at the outcome of this
process (Mena and Palazzo, 2012; Arnesen, 2017). In a democracy, both need to be in place.
This idea of input and output legitimacy is different from, but also resonates with legitimacy
conceptions in management studies. Here, legitimacy of organizations has been defined as the
“generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or
appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions”
(Suchman, 1995, p. 574). This idea springs from the notion of the implicit “license to operate” that
society grants companies to exist (Donaldson and Preston, 1995). Three classic types of
CCIJ organizational legitimacy are distinguished: pragmatic, cognitive and moral. Pragmatic
24,1 legitimacy refers to the instrumental notion of give-and-take, for instance, a company is a good
corporate citizen and therefore customers will buy their products. Pragmatic legitimacy is, thus,
connected to an instrumental perspective in CSR theory, where companies act on and
communicate their social and environmental responsibilities because they want to achieve a
favorable outcome such as higher sales or a better stock market reputation. Strategies to gain
6 pragmatic legitimacy are strategic and exchange based (Nielsen and Thomsen, 2018).
Cognitive legitimacy, on the other hand, refers to the normative “taken-for-grantedness”
(Suchman, 1995, p. 582) of organizations that is given as long as stakeholders’ expectations are
satisfied. Thus, cognitive legitimacy is attained if the company’s right to exist is commonly
accepted by society. Such judgments of cognitive legitimacy are value- and norm-based and are
dependent on an overlap between stakeholders’ and organizations’ norms. However, companies
need to know about stakeholders’ demands and, thus, ask about their expectations. Thus,
“cognitive legitimacy is anchored in the impetus to conform to perception models” (Nielsen and
Thomsen, 2018, p. 11). From a political science perspective, both pragmatic and cognitive
legitimacy can be regarded as forms of output legitimacy, where cognitive legitimacy needs to
be established before pragmatic legitimacy can be achieved (Suchman, 1995; Nielsen and
Thomsen, 2018). Hence, stakeholders’ norm-based expectations need to be met before they are
willing to engage in a (e.g. monetary) exchange.
As a third type, moral legitimacy comes closest to the idea of input legitimacy, as it rests
“on judgments about whether the activity is ‘the right thing to do’ ” (Suchman, 1995, p. 579)
and is established in a process of moral reasoning (Nielsen and Thomsen, 2018). Here, CSR
issues are ideally deliberated with involved stakeholders such that all voices can have a say
in the issue and are heard. The notion goes back to the ideas of ethical discourse and
deliberative democracy formulated by Habermas, and picked up in political-normative CSR
theory (Scherer and Palazzo, 2011).
These three legitimacy types are co-occurring, contingent and formed in a complex process
of meaning making (Basu and Palazzo, 2008). Focusing on one instant of the CSR
communication process, i.e., corporate websites, and within the context of the fashion industry,
this study attempts to test all three types of legitimacy as consequences of credible CSR
communication. To test for cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy, we follow an input-output
legitimacy idea where cognitive legitimacy is based on stakeholders’ expectations and is tested
before pragmatic legitimacy (Arnesen, 2017; RQ1). We manipulate moral legitimacy, based on
its roots in deliberation, through participation in the communication process (RQ2). The study
sets out to answer these two research questions:
RQ1. To what extent does perceived credibility of CSR websites result in cognitive and
pragmatic organizational legitimacy?
RQ2. In how far do participation in the CSR decision and the outcome of the CSR
decision-making process influence judgments of organizational legitimacy?

Hypotheses development
While some research found positive effects of corporate credibility on legitimacy
( Jahn et al., 2017; Bachmann and Ingenhoff, 2016), the credibility of the communication tool,
here, the website, has not been subject to analysis. To test the credibility–legitimacy
relationship and shows that credible CSR communication on a website of a company from a
challenged industry leads to cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy, it is hypothesized:
H1. Perceived credibility leads to cognitive legitimacy.
H2. Perceived credibility leads to pragmatic legitimacy.
Following Suchman (1995, p. 582), cognitive legitimacy “must mesh both with larger belief CSR
systems and with the experienced reality of the audience’s daily life.” Therefore, on the one communication
hand it comes close to the idea of stakeholder expectations management; on the other hand,
it is a form of outcome legitimacy, with the stakeholder granting legitimacy if the outcome of
the (communication) process is favorable to him/her. Since cognitive legitimacy is
operationalized as the perceived agreement with the decision, the input into the
decision-making process will logically impact the outcome (Mena and Palazzo, 2012). To test 7
their preferences, respondents could indicate their preference for a CSR topic that was to be
included in the CSR website (topic choice). Therefore, stakeholders that stated their
preference for a topic which was finally also chosen by the company will likely agree more
with the decision (decision agreement). Pragmatic legitimacy entails “an exchange of
benefits between companies and stakeholders to create a symbiotic relationship”
(Berry, 2017, p. 126). This describes a give-and-take situation where the stakeholder
receives something in return for some investment. Thus, we view pragmatic legitimacy as
given if a stakeholder is willing to buy a product from the company, as this counts as a
direct exchange and is one of the – if not the – most researched outcome variable in an
instrumental, promotion-based CSR perspective (Nielsen and Thomsen, 2018):
H3. Topic choice has a positive influence on decision agreement. The more the topic
choice is in line with the outcome, the higher the agreement to the decision.
Since “pragmatic, moral, and cognitive legitimacy co-exist in most real-world settings”
(Suchman, 1995, p. 584), and cognitive legitimacy is a basis for pragmatic exchanges
between stakeholders and companies, we assume that the preference for a topic will also
impact pragmatic legitimacy positively:
H4. Topic choice has a positive influence on purchase intention. The more the topic
choice is in line with the outcome, the higher the intention to purchase.
Furthermore, the more a stakeholder’s expectations are met as tested here in terms of his/her
agreement with the decision, the higher we also assume their intention to purchase a
product of the company will be, thus testing cognitive legitimacy as an antecedent to
pragmatic legitimacy:
H5. Cognitive legitimacy has a positive influence on pragmatic legitimacy.
Arnesen (2017, p. 147) found that “[t]he respondents clearly react more negatively to the
decision when the outcome differs from their stated preference.” Applied to our context, we
can test whether stakeholders’ stated topic preferences was more important for their
legitimacy perceptions than receiving credible CSR communication. This is also in line with
the idea that CSR communication meets a “cynical public” (Illia et al., 2013) that seeks personal
gains and overall skepticism toward this communication form (Waddock and Googins, 2011):
H6. The effect of topic choice on legitimacy is higher than perceived credibility on legitimacy.
The idea behind moral legitimacy as further developed by political CSR scholars
(Scherer et al., 2013) is that it emerges from a communication process that is credible and
oriented toward consensus; thus, participation in the decision-making process (input
legitimacy) as propagated in deliberative democracy studies is key for this type of
legitimacy. Since, it is difficult to measure this latent construct, this study approximates a
situation of moral legitimacy. We manipulate participation in a CSR communication process
as on the one hand participating in the decision and on the other hand stating a preference in
the topic of the decision. This follows approaches to studying the perceived decision-making
influence of citizens on the favourability of political decisions deliberative democratic
settings in the political sciences (Arnesen, 2017). The basic idea of Arnesen’s (2017) study is
CCIJ to test what is more important to subjects when they can decide to spend money on an issue:
24,1 that they can participate in the outcome or that the outcome is in line with their preference.
Given that political CSR theory is rooted in deliberative democracy theory, this seems an apt
approach to approximate the normative concept of moral legitimacy, because it simulates
that stakeholders can voice their preferences and, thus, deliberate about CSR issues
(Nielsen and Thomsen, 2018).
8 We approximate conditions of moral legitimacy by manipulating stakeholders’
participation in the decision-making process of the CSR communication situation. Political
CSR theory assumes, based on Habermasian deliberative democracy, that participation in a
communication process is a normative foundation of all deliberation (Scherer and Palazzo,
2011). A deliberative – and credible – CSR communication process, thus, can lead to moral
legitimacy (Berry, 2017). Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H7. Participation in the decision-making process influences cognitive legitimacy positively.
H8. Participation in the decision-making process influences pragmatic legitimacy positively.
Additionally, we assume that the perceived credibility of the website can be affected by
existing attitudes about the industry, CSR in general and participants’ prior knowledge
about the product. Due to prominent cases of corporate hypocrisy, many consumers dismiss
CSR measures as window dressing or greenwashing (Connors et al., 2017). Therefore, in
general skepticism toward an organizations’ CSR claims exists (Brown and Krishna, 2004),
which is why the attitude toward CSR can influence reception (Obermiller and Spangenberg,
1998). At the same time, the fashion industry is a challenged industry that struggles with
negative reputation. Since CSR and its communication are industry dependent (Fifka, 2013),
we controlled for participants’ attitudes toward the fashion industry. Last, an individuals’
involvement in the company’s product, in our case clothing, is further expected to affect
credibility judgements, because consumers evaluate information about a high involvement
product in line with their existing attitude (Bloch and Richins, 1983). Thus, we included the
control variables CSR attitude, industry attitude and clothing interest in our model.
The final conceptual model is depicted in Figure 1.

Method
Experimental design and participants
The study employs a 2 between-subjects (participation: participating vs not participating) × 2
between-subjects (topic choice: preferred choice vs not preferred choice) experimental design
to test the hypotheses. German participants were recruited via the SoSci Survey Panel
(Leiner, 2014) between the December 10, 2017 and January 10, 2018. A total of 423 participants
clicked on the link sent to them, but only 328 filled out the questionnaire completely.

Cognitive Legitimacy

H3
Topic choice Decision agreement
Control variables
CSR
attitude
H1 H4
Perceived credibility H5
Industry H2
H8
attitude Pragmatic Legitimacy

Interest in
clothing Participation Purchase intention
Figure 1. H7
Conceptual model
Moral Legitimacy
An additional seven participants were deleted, since they failed to answer an attention check CSR
question correctly. This resulted in 321 participants (56 percent female, 44 percent male; age communication
M ¼ 40.63, SD ¼ 16.25). Overall, the sample had a slightly higher level of education than the
German population (2 percent secondary school diploma, 11 percent junior high school
diploma, 31 percent high school diploma, 19 percent Bachelor’s degree, 29 percent Master’s
degree, 6 percent PhD, 1 percent not completed and 2 percent not specified).
Table I shows the distribution of participants to experimental groups. 9
Stimuli
The stimulus material of the study consists of a CSR website of an anonymized clothing
label. On the website, the label presents three of their current CSR measures; one about
the increase of organic cotton, the second about the promise to increase transparency
about the company’s supply chain and the third on fight of child labor. The design and
content of the website was adapted and translated from the English CSR website of the
clothing label C&A.

Participation
Participation serves as a between-subjects variable and takes two conditions, participating
vs not participating. Participation was manipulated by giving participants the choice
between two CSR measures, one topic about support for women and another about recycling
of textiles. Subjects were asked to indicate which CSR topic they preferred to be added to the
CSR website of the label. In the participation condition, the participants received the
question: “You are a regular customer of the clothing label. The label wants to invest an
additional 100,000 Euro in a new CSR measure and would like to know your opinion. As a
regular customer, you have a say in in this decision. Which topic do you prefer to be
included in the website?”. Thus, in the participating condition, participants could actively
take part in the decision-making process since their preference for a new CSR measure was
taken into account by the label in its decision. In the not participating condition, the question
wording was changed to: “You are a regular customer of the clothing label. The label wants
to invest an additional 100,000 Euro in a new CSR measure and would like to know your
opinion. Which topic do you prefer to be included in the website?” Here, participants stated
their preferred CSR measure, but were not told that their choice would impact the decision of
the label and thus could not actively take part in the decision-making process, but only
indicate their preference.

Topic choice
Topic choice is a between-subjects variable and takes the two conditions preferred choice vs
not preferred choice. Preferred choice means that the final decision of the clothing label on

Topic choice
Participation Preferred Not preferred

Participating Group 1 Group 2

(59) (104)
Not Participating Group 3 Group 4
(99) (59)
Notes: The unequal number of participants per group is due to the study design: overall, in both the participating Table I.
and not participating condition, participants selected the measure “textile recycling” (62 percent) almost twice as Experimental design
much as “support for women” (38 percent). They were then randomly presented with either “textile recycling” or and group
“support for women” as the chosen measure by the clothing label, which resulted in unequal groups sizes (in brackets)
CCIJ which CSR measure to include on the website is align with the participant’s preferred choice
24,1 in the participation manipulation. Thus, subject’s preferring the support for women
(textile recycling) measure, will receive the message “The label has decided to include the
measure support for women (textile recycling) on their website” and are shown how the new
CSR-measure is presented on the website. In the not preferred choice condition, the final
decision of the clothing label deviates from the participant’s preferred choice. This means
10 participants who chose to include support for women (textile recycling) receive the message
“The label has decided to include the measure textile recycling (support for women) on their
website,” again showing how the CSR-measure is presented on the website.

Measures
Perceived credibility assesses how credible participants rated the clothing label’s website
by judging the content in the four dimensions understandability, truth, sincerity and
appropriateness. It was measured by the validated 16-item PERCRED scale by Lock
and Seele (2017) (see Appendix 1) on a five-point Likert-scale (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree”–
5 ¼ “Strongly agree”). The reliability of the scale was excellent and the averaged to form a
composite score for analysis (M ¼ 3.36, SD ¼ 0.64, α ¼ 0.90).
CSR attitude serves as a control variable to estimate participant’s existing attitudes of
CSR practices. CSR attitude is measured by three items of the adapted consumer-skepticism
scale by Obermiller and Spangenberg (1998) on a five-point Likert-scale (1 ¼ “Strongly
disagree”–5 ¼ “Strongly agree”) (see Appendix 1). The reliability of the scale was good and
items were averaged to form a composite score for analysis (M ¼ 3.51, SD ¼ 0.87, α ¼ 0.81).
Industry attitude was assessed to control for participant’s existing opinions about the
clothing industry. It was measured by five adjectives on a five-point semantic scale.
The reliability of the scale was good and averaged to form a composite score (M ¼ 3.62,
SD ¼ 0.65, α ¼ 0.81).
Clothing interest controls for a person’s interest in fashion matters and was measured by
the adapted four-item “Interest and Involvement” scale by Mehta and Sivadas (1995) on a
five-point Likert-scale (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree”–5 ¼ “Strongly agree”). The reliability of the
scale was good and averaged to form a composite score (M ¼ 2.10, SD ¼ 0.87, α ¼ 0.88).
Decision agreement is a dependent variable and assesses to what extent the participants
agree with the label’s decision regarding its final decision on which of the two proposed CSR
measures to include on the website. It is measured by the item “To what degree do you
find this decision acceptable?” on a five-point Likert scale (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree”–
5 ¼ “Strongly agree”) (M ¼ 3.62, SD ¼ 1.14).
Purchase intention is the second dependent variable and asks the participant to indicate
the likelihood to purchase products from the label. It is assessed by the three-item, five-point
semantic scale by Yi (1990) (Appendix 1). The reliability of the scale was excellent and
averaged to form a composite score (M ¼ 3.59, SD ¼ 0.93, α ¼ 0.90).

Procedure
Respondents accessed the experiment by clicking on a link sent to them by the SoSci panel
on December 10, 2018. On the opening page, respondents were informed that the study is
conducted by the Amsterdam School of Communication Research and investigates their
perception of a CSR website of an anonymous fashion label. Furthermore, they were assured
of their anonymity, provided with contact details and asked to give their informed consent
before starting the questionnaire.
First, respondents answered the control variables industry attitude and interest in
clothing. They were then shown the CSR website of the label. After reading the website,
respondents were asked to evaluate the website by answering the items of the perceived
credibility scale. They were then randomly assigned to the two participation conditions in
which they indicated their preferred CSR-measure. This was followed by a distraction CSR
exercise before continuing the questionnaire for which participants were able to provide communication
their e-mail address for the chance of winning one of five Amazon gift vouchers. Based on
their topic choice of CSR-measure, participants were then randomly assigned to either the
preferred condition or the not preferred condition. Lastly, they answered the items of
the dependent variables decision agreement and purchase intention as well as the items of
the CSR attitude scale. 11
After finishing the questionnaire, respondents were thanked and debriefed that the true
intention of the questionnaire was to measure the influence of participation and topic choice
on decision agreement and intention to purchase. Further, they were told that the website was
inspired by the CSR website of the label C&A, but was not involved in the study.

Findings
Randomization check
Randomization checks yielded no significant differences across the groups regarding the
demographic variables age and gender and regarding the control variables interest in
clothing, CSR attitude and industry attitude (see Table AI). This means that participants
were equally divided across groups, and it can therefore be expected that these variables are
not responsible for significant differences between groups.
Model specification and fit. To test the hypothesized theoretical model, we specified a
path model in AMOS in which we included all constructs as manifest variables.
The complete path model is depicted in Figure 2. To evaluate model fit, the following criteria
were used: Model χ2-test, in which a non-significant p-value represents acceptable model fit
(Kline, 2011), CFI, which should range between 0.90 and 1.00 for acceptable model fit
(Bentler, 1990), and RMSEA, with a cut-off value ⩽ 0.05 (Mulaik, 2009). The model
converged well and fit of the model was excellent ( χ2(8) ¼ 9.029, p ¼ 0.340, CFI ¼ 1.00,
RMSEA ¼ 0.02, CI {0.00; 0.07}).
Overall, the theoretical model could explain about 14 percent (R2 ¼ 0.14) of the variance
of cognitive legitimacy, measured by decision agreement, and about 39 percent (R2 ¼ 0.39)
of the variance of pragmatic legitimacy, measured by purchase intention.

Hypotheses testing
H1 states that perceived credibility leads to cognitive legitimacy. Cognitive legitimacy was
assessed in the experiment by decision agreement. The results show that there was a
moderate positive effect from perceived credibility on decision agreement ( β ¼ 0.24,
p o0.001). Thus, H1 can be accepted. H2 states that perceived credibility leads to pragmatic
legitimacy, measured by the intention to purchase. Perceived credibility exerts a moderate

2
Cognitive Legitimacy R = 0.14

0.29 (0.65)***
Topic choice
Decision agreement
Control variables
2
CSR –0.24 (–0.17)*** R = 0.18
attitude
0.24 (0.43)***
–0.23 (–0.22)*** ns
Perceived credibility
Industry 0.31 (0.25)***
0.48 (0.69)*** ns
attitude Pragmatic Legitimacy 2
R = 0.39

Interest in 0.15 (0.11)**

clothing Purchase intention
Participation ns Figure 2.
Conceptual model
and results
Notes: **,***Significant at p < 0.01 and p < 0.00 levels, respectively
CCIJ effect on purchase intention ( β ¼ 0.48, p o0.001); thus, we accept H2. Overall, perceived
24,1 credibility of the CSR website leads to both cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy.
H3 concerns the effect of topic choice on decision agreement and states that the more the
topic choice is in line with the outcome, the higher the agreement to the decision. In the path
model, the not preferred choice was given the value “1,” while the preferred choice was given
the value “2.” Thus, the moderately positive effect of topic choice on decision agreement
12 ( β ¼ 0.29, p o0.001) supports H3. Therefore, we conclude that participants agreed more
with the decision of the fashion company when it matched their own preference.
Regarding H4, which stated that topic choice (stated preference) has a positive influence
on purchase intention, no significant effects were found and H4 is therefore not supported.
This means that topic choice did not have a direct effect on purchase intention, and does
therefore not predict pragmatic legitimacy. However, the indirect effect of topic choice on
pragmatic legitimacy through cognitive legitimacy was significant ( β ¼ 0.16, p o0.001).
Therefore, the effect of preferred topic on purchase intention was fully mediated by decision
agreement, further emphasizing that cognitive legitimacy leads to pragmatic legitimacy.
Thus, the hypothesis can only partially be confirmed.
We hypothesized that cognitive legitimacy has a positive effect on pragmatic legitimacy
(H5). The results show a moderately positive effect from decision agreement on purchase
intention ( β ¼ 0.31, po0.001), confirming H5. Thus, agreement with the decision of the fashion
company leads to higher intention to purchase its products, thus pragmatic legitimacy.
H6 states that the effect of topic choice on legitimacy is higher than the effect of
perceived credibility on legitimacy. Comparing the effect sizes, the hypothesis can be
confirmed for cognitive legitimacy, since the effect size of topic choice on decision agreement
is higher ( β ¼ 0.29, p o0.001) than the effect of perceived credibility ( β ¼ 0.24, p o0.001).
Regarding the effect of preferred topic on pragmatic legitimacy, the effect of topic choice on
purchase intention is not significant.
Lastly, for H7 and H8, we expect a positive effect of participation in the decision-making
process on both cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy. For both, the results show a non-significant
effect of participation. Hence, participation in the decision-making process on attributing
legitimacy did not significantly differ, which leads us to reject H7 and H8 (Table II).

Additional results
The control variables CSR attitude, industry attitude and interest in clothing were
introduced in the model to control for their impact on perceived credibility (Lock and
Seele, 2017). As discussed previously, they did not significantly differ across experimental
groups and therefore do not impact the interpretation of the results. Interestingly,
however, all control variables exert a significant effect on perceived credibility and
account for 18 percent (R2 ¼ 0.18) of its explained variance. CSR attitude exerted a

Hypothesis Confirmed

H1. Perceived credibility leads to cognitive legitimacy Yes

H2. Perceived credibility leads to pragmatic legitimacy Yes
H3. Topic choice has a positive influence on decision agreement. The more the topic choice is in Yes
line with the outcome, the higher the agreement to the decision
H4. Topic choice has a positive influence on purchase intention. The more the topic choice is in No
line with the outcome, the higher the intention to purchase
H5. Cognitive legitimacy has a positive influence on pragmatic legitimacy Yes
Table II. H6. The effect of topic choice on legitimacy is higher than perceived credibility on legitimacy No
Results of H7. Participation in the decision-making process influences cognitive legitimacy positively No
hypothesis testing H8. Participation in the decision-making process influences pragmatic legitimacy positively No
moderately negative effect on perceived credibility, meaning that participants that CSR
were more skeptic towards CSR practices of organizations also perceived the website communication
as less credible ( β ¼ −0.24, p o 0.001). The same trend was found with respect to
industry attitude. Those who had a worse opinion of the clothing industry also perceived
the website of the label as less credible ( β ¼ −0.23, p o 0.001). Interest in clothing, on
the other hand, showed a small positive effect on perceived credibility ( β ¼ 0.15,
p ¼ 0.003), meaning that those more interested in fashion matters evaluated the website 13
as more credible.

Discussion and contribution: confirming the credibility–legitimacy link

In general, our results suggest that the credibility of corporate communication tools cannot
be overrated. Although there is no one best way to communicate CSR as invoked by some
authors in corporate communication, we can suggest with confidence that communicating
credibly is key. Attending to source credibility alone ( Jackob, 2008) does not do justice to
complex organization–stakeholder relationships managed through CSR communication
(Heath et al., 2013), but the credibility of the tools needs to be in the focus. The more credible
the CSR website of a firm, the more likely it is that pragmatic and cognitive legitimacy
perceptions are evoked in stakeholders. Thus, cognitive and then pragmatic legitimacy
results from a credible, output-based communication process. This main finding confirms
the theoretical link established by the normative CSR theory (Scherer and Palazzo, 2011;
Seele and Lock, 2015).
For the political CSR theory, this study shows that credible communication is key “for the
continuous flow of resources and for securing the sustained support of the organization’s
constituencies” (Scherer et al., 2013, p. 262), for which legitimacy is a necessary precondition.
But also instrumental conceptions of CSR can benefit from our insights: we show that
pragmatic outcomes of CSR communication processes such as purchase intentions are
enhanced with credible CSR communication. Contributing to a more constitutive CSR
perspective, we confirm that communication is indeed key to legitimation processes and that
perceptions of CSR communication are dependent on the context. Credibility perceptions are
moderately negatively influenced by participants’ prior attitudes toward CSR and toward
the industry of the company, while the more interested subjects were in fashion, the more
credible they found the website to be.
The type of legitimacy matters include: output, i.e. cognitive and pragmatic, and
legitimacy was more important to stakeholders than input, i.e. moral, legitimacy. The more
participants’ preferences were met, the more they found a company to be legitimate.
This cognitive legitimacy is a precondition for pragmatic legitimacy perceptions. Thus,
engaging stakeholders succeeds if their preferences are taken into account (Lim and
Greenwood, 2017). This confirms the idea of CSR as stakeholder expectations management
(Podnar and Golob, 2007), particularly in challenged industries such as pharmaceuticals
(O’Riordan and Fairbrass, 2008) or fashion, where companies try to respond to stakeholders’
expectations because of the public spotlight and past scandals. Regarding cognitive
legitimacy, meeting stakeholders’ preferences was even more important than credible CSR
communication. However, this was not the case for pragmatic legitimacy. Thus, isomorphic
adaptation to changing stakeholder expectations and attitudes can be a key for re- and
maintaining legitimacy (Scherer et al., 2013).
Against political-normative approaches to CSR communication, our results show that
participation in the CSR communication and decision-making process does not predict
legitimacy. Whether the respondents had an influence on the decision which CSR topic
should be treated on the website, did not significantly impact how they perceived the
decision. As Arnesen (2017) puts it, “output legitimacy trumps input legitimacy.” The idea
of deliberation as a key to reaching an understanding between different parties in a
CCIJ discourse being the backbone of the deliberative democracy theory (Habermas, 1996) can,
24,1 however, still hold true for CSR communication, but such understanding does not
necessarily lead to more (or less) perceived legitimacy. Thus, facilitating participation in a
CSR communication process should not be a goal in and of itself, because there is no direct
link to legitimacy. Rather should active stakeholder participation be encouraged because
such participation results in better decisions (Arnesen, 2017). Thus, moral legitimacy can
14 be regarded more as a procedural legitimacy component that defines legitimate
communication processes for reaching better legitimacy outcomes rather than an end
in itself. Therefore, the emphasis of participation in political CSR communication might be
exaggerated in practice. The source of legitimacy, as tested here, is clearly the credibility
of the corporate communication tool, not participation. This finding, however, does
not entail that stakeholder engagement is to be neglected; rather, credible communication
is its basis.

Conclusions
This study adds to the debate on public relations in post-truth times by showing that
stakeholders regard credible CSR communication as more legitimate than non-credible
information. It provides empirical evidence that perceived credibility of a CSR website is a
main predictor of corporate legitimacy and, thus, fills an empirical gap. We also extend
current corporate communication and CSR communication theory by finding
that participation in CSR-related decision-making processes is overrated: it is the
outcome of the CSR communication process that is important for stakeholders and
for their acceptance of a company in society, not so much the participation in the process.
Hence, cognitive and pragmatic legitimacy are key, while moral legitimacy is regarded as
making decisions better, but not as making them more acceptable. Of course, the
CSR communication process of this experiment is just one specific example of
constructing a CSR reality. In other settings, such as social media and including other
stakeholders such as ordinary citizens, the role of participation in a CSR communication
process will be different (Etter et al., 2018; Romenti et al., 2014). But when it comes to
participation of stakeholders in a two-way communication setting involving popular
channels such as a website, credibility weighs more for perceived legitimacy than “having
a say” in an issue.
These findings hold important practical implications: to successfully manage
organization–stakeholder relations, designing credible communication material matters
for legitimacy . Referring to understandability of the contents, truthful information, sincere
communication and an appropriate context for different stakeholders can be key points for
consideration. Such credible communication is not only desirable from an ethical
perspective, but may also positively impact on organizational performance and the flow of
resources. When managing credibility perceptions of a company’s CSR communication,
corporate communication practitioners are advised to attend to the company in its broader
context: its industry and current issues, and also keep a close eye on stakeholders’
preconceptions. In this vein, flexibly adapting to stakeholder expectations is a key for
companies to maintain legitimate in the eyes of their constituents.

Limitations and directions for future research

These findings do not come without limitations. Our results are based on a German
sample representing potential customers of an anonymized label without prior reputation.
Future studies should, therefore, test our model on international and different
stakeholders such as business partners and employees and with existing fashion
labels to increase validity. Furthermore, including the flip side of credibility
perceptions – greenwashing – as a concept in further experiments would be worthwhile
in terms of discriminant validity. Here, it would be relevant to take attitudes toward the CSR
business, not only the industry, into account. Due to the controversial nature of the fashion communication
industry, research should also investigate the role of credible CSR communication in other
industries not immediately associated with questionable practices. Further, our study
assessed the perceived credibility of a CSR website which did not allow for further
interaction between the users and the organization. As a next step, research could be
conducted on a different communication channel, such as on social media that allows for 15
interactivity. This is especially relevant as it would put the communicative process in
focus, which is relevant in a deliberative democracy to reach consensus and give
legitimacy to actions.

References
Arnesen, S. (2017), “Legitimacy from decision-making influence and outcome favourability: results
from general population survey experiments”, Political Studies, Vol. 65 No. 1, pp. 146-161.
Arrigo, E. (2013), “Corporate responsibility management in fast fashion companies: the gap Inc.
case”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2,
pp. 175-189.
Auger, G.A. (2014), “Trust me, trust me not: an experimental analysis of the effect of transparency on
organizations”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 325-343.
Bachmann, P. and Ingenhoff, D. (2016), “Legitimacy through CSR disclosures? The advantage
outweighs the disadvantages”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 386-394.
Bansal, H.S., McDougall, G.H., Dikolli, S.S. and Sedatole, K.L. (2004), “Relating e-satisfaction
to behavioral outcomes: an empirical study”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4,
pp. 290-302.
Basu, K. and Palazzo, G. (2008), “Corporate social responsibility: a process model of sensemaking”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 122-136.
Bentele, G. and Nothaft, H. (2011), “Trust and credibility as the basis of corporate social responsibility”,
in Ihlen, O., Bartlett, J.L. and May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate
Social Responsibility, Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, pp. 208-230.
Bentler, P.M. (1990), “Comparative fit indexes in structural models”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 107
No. 2, pp. 238-246.
Berry, A. (2017), “Legitimization as a rhetorical process in a regulatory agency: an examination of
rhetoric from the US council for higher education accreditation”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 124-139.
Bloch, P.H. and Richins, M.L. (1983), “A theoretical model for the study of product importance
perceptions”, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 69-81.
Boyd, J. (2009), “The legitimacy of a baseball number”, in Heath, R.L., Toth, E. and Waymer, D.
(Eds), Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations II, Routledge, New York, NY,
pp. 154-169.
Brown, C.L. and Krishna, A. (2004), “The skeptical shopper: a metacognitive account for the effects of
default options on choice”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 529-539.
Cai, Y., Jo, H. and Pan, C. (2012), “Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 108 No. 4, pp. 467-480.
Caniato, F., Caridi, M., Crippa, L. and Moretto, A. (2012), “Environmental sustainability in fashion
supply chains: an exploratory case based research”, International Journal of Production
Economics, Vol. 135 No. 2, pp. 659-670.
Capriotti, P. and Moreno, A. (2007), “Corporate citizenship and public relations: the importance and
interactivity of social responsibility issues on corporate websites”, Public Relations Review,
Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 84-91.
CCIJ Castelló, I. and Lozano, J.M. (2011), “Searching for new forms of legitimacy through corporate
24,1 responsibility rhetoric”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 100 No. 1, pp. 11-29.
Chen, Q. and Wells, W.D. (1999), “Attitude toward the site”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 39
No. 5, pp. 27-37.
Chung, J.Y., Berger, B.K. and DeCoster, J. (2016), “Developing measurement scales of organizational and
issue legitimacy: a case of direct-to-consumer advertising in the pharmaceutical industry”,
16 Journal of Business Ethics, No. 2, pp. 405-413.
Connors, S., Anderson-MacDonald, S. and Thomson, M. (2017), “Overcoming the ‘window
dressing’effect: mitigating the negative effects of inherent skepticism towards corporate
social responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 145 No. 3, pp. 599-621.
Coombs, W.T. (1992), “The failure of the task force on food assistance: a case study of the role of
legitimacy in issue management”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 4 No. 2,
pp. 101-122.
Cornelissen, J.P. (2014), Corporate Communication, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Crane, A. and Glozer, S. (2016), “Researching corporate social responsibility communication: themes,
opportunities and challenges”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 53 No. 7, pp. 1223-1252.
Da Giau, A., Macchion, L., Caniato, F., Caridi, M., Danese, P., Rinaldi, R. and Vinelli, A. (2016),
“Sustainability practices and web-based communication: an analysis of the Italian fashion
industry”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 72-88.
Deephouse, D.L. and Carter, S.M. (2005), “An examination of differences between organizational
legitimacy and organizational reputation”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 42 No. 2,
pp. 329-360.
Donaldson, T. and Preston, L.E. (1995), “The stakeholder theory of the cowarporation: concepts,
evidence, and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 65-91.
Du, S. and Vieira, E.T. (2012), “Striving for legitimacy through corporate social responsibility: insights
from oil companies”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 110 No. 4, pp. 413-427.
Edwards, L. (2010), “Authenticity in organisational context: fragmentation, contradiction and loss of
control”, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 192-205.
Etter, M., Colleoni, E., Illia, L., Meggiorin, K. and D’Eugenio, A. (2018), “Measuring organizational
legitimacy in social media: assessing citizens’ judgments with sentiment analysis”, Business &
Society, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 60-97.
Fifka, M.S. (2013), “Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective:
a review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis”, Business Strategy and the Environment,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1-35.
Fletcher, K. (2013), Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys, Routledge, London.
Fooks, G., Gilmore, A., Collin, J., Holden, C. and Lee, K. (2013), “The limits of corporate social
responsibility: techniques of neutralization, stakeholder management and political CSR”, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 112 No. 2, pp. 283-299.
Fooks, G.J., Gilmore, A.B., Smith, K.E., Collin, J., Holden, C. and Lee, K. (2011), “Corporate social
responsibility and access to policy élites: an analysis of tobacco industry documents”, PLoS
Medicine, Vol. 8 No. 8, pp. 1-12.
Fulton, K. and Lee, S.E. (2013), “Assessing sustainable initiatives of apparel retailers on the internet”,
Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 353-366.
Golant, B.D. and Sillince, J.A. (2007), “The constitution of organizational legitimacy: a narrative
perspective”, Organization Studies, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 1149-1167.
Habermas, J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and
Democracy, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Heath, R.L., Waymer, D. and Palenchar, M.J. (2013), “Is the universe of democracy, rhetoric, and CSR
public relations whole cloth or three separate galaxies?”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, communication
pp. 271-279.
Heidbrink, L. and Lorch, A. (2017), Post-Truth-Management: Die postfaktische Verantwortungslosigkeit
in Unternehmen, Kursbuch, Hamburg.
Illia, L., Zyglidopoulos, S.C., Romenti, S., Rodríguez-Cánovas, B. and del Valle Brena, A.G. (2013),
“Communicating corporate social responsibility to a cynical public”, MIT Sloan Management 17
Review, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 15-18.
Jackob, N. (2008), “Credibility effects”, in Donsbach, W. (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of
Communication, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 1044-1047.
Jahn, J., Eichhorn, M. and Brühl, R. (2017), “How do individuals judge organizational legitimacy?
Effects of attributed motives and credibility on organizational legitimacy”, Business & Society,
doi: 0007650317717959.
Johansen, S.T. and Ellerup Nielsen, A. (2011), “Strategic stakeholder dialogues: a discursive perspective
on relationship building”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3,
pp. 204-217.
Keller, K.L. and Aaker, D.A. (1992), “The effects of sequential introduction of brand extensions”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 35-50.
Kent, M.L. and Taylor, M. (1998), “Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide Web”,
Public Relations Review, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 321-334.
Kline, R. (2011), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 3rd ed., Guilford Press,
New York, NY.
Leiner, D.J. (2014), “Convenience samples from online respondent pools: a case study of the SoSci
panel”, International Journal of Internet Science, Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 1-18.
Lim, J.S. and Greenwood, C.A. (2017), “Communicating corporate social responsibility (CSR):
stakeholder responsiveness and engagement strategy to achieve CSR goals”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 768-776.
Lock, I. and Seele, P. (2017), “Measuring credibility perceptions in CSR communication: a scale
development to test readers’ perceived credibility of CSR reports”, Management Communication
Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 584-613.
Luoma-aho, V. and Vos, M. (2010), “Towards a more dynamic stakeholder model: acknowledging
multiple issue arenas”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 315-331.
Massey, J.E. (2001), “Managing organizational legitimacy: communication strategies for organizations
in crisis”, The Journal of Business Communication (1973), Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 153-182.
Mehta, R. and Sivadas, E. (1995), “Direct marketing on the Internet: an empirical assessment of
consumer attitudes”, Journal of Direct Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 21-32.
Mena, S. and Palazzo, G. (2012), “Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives”, Business
Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 527-556.
Mulaik, S.A. (2009), Linear Causal Modeling With Structural Equations, Chapman and Hall/CRC,
New York, NY.
Newell, S.J. and Goldsmith, R.E. (2001), “The development of a scale to measure perceived corporate
credibility”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 235-247.
Nielsen, A.E. and Thomsen, C. (2018), “Reviewing corporate social responsibility communication: a
legitimacy perspective”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4,
pp. 492-511.
Obermiller, C. and Spangenberg, E.R. (1998), “Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism
toward advertising”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 159-186.
Ohanian, R. (1991), “The impact of celebrity spokespersons’ perceived image on consumers’ intention to
purchase”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 31 No. 1.
CCIJ O’Riordan, L. and Fairbrass, J. (2008), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR): models and theories in
24,1 stakeholder dialogue”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 745-758.
Parkinson, J. (2003), “Legitimacy problems in deliberative democracy”, Political Studies, Vol. 51 No. 1,
pp. 180-196.
Pedersen, E.R.G. and Andersen, K.R. (2015), “Sustainability innovators and anchor draggers: a global
expert study on sustainable fashion”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 19
18 No. 3, pp. 315-327.
Piketty, T. (2014), Capital in the 21st Century, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Podnar, K. and Golob, U. (2007), “CSR expectations: the focus of corporate marketing”, Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 326-340.
Reast, J., Maon, F., Lindgreen, A. and Vanhamme, J. (2013), “Legitimacy-seeking organizational
strategies in controversial industries: a case study analysis and a bidimensional model”, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 118 No. 1, pp. 139-153.
Romenti, S., Murtarelli, G. and Valentini, C. (2014), “Organisations’ conversations in social media:
applying dialogue strategies in times of crises”, Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 10-33.
Ruef, M. and Scott, W.R. (1998), “A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: hospital
survival in changing institutional environments”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 43
No. 4, pp. 877-904.
Scherer, A.G. and Palazzo, G. (2011), “The new political role of business in a globalized world: a review
of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy”,
Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 899-931.
Scherer, A.G., Palazzo, G. and Seidl, D. (2013), “Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous
environments: sustainable development in a globalized world”, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 259-284.
Schultz, F., Castelló, I. and Morsing, M. (2013), “The construction of corporate social responsibility
in network societies: a communication view”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 115 No. 4,
pp. 681-692.
Seele, P. and Lock, I. (2015), “Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication
tools”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 131 No. 2, pp. 401-414.
Seuring, S. and Müller, M. (2008), “From a literature review to a conceptual framework for
sustainable supply chain management”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 15,
pp. 1699-1710.
Shim, K. and Yang, S.U. (2016), “The effect of bad reputation: the occurrence of crisis, corporate social
responsibility, and perceptions of hypocrisy and attitudes toward a company”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 68-78.
Suchman, M.C. (1995), “Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 571-610.
Tang, L., Gallagher, C.C. and Bie, B. (2015), “Corporate social responsibility communication through
corporate websites: a comparison of leading corporations in the United States and China”,
International Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 205-227.
Waddock, S. and Googins, B.K. (2011), “The paradoxes of communicating corporate social
responsibility”, in Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J. and May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and
Corporate Social Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 23-43.
Wæraas, A. (2018), “On weber: legitimacy and legitimation in public relations”, in Ihlen, O.
and Fredriksson, M. (Eds), Public Relations and Social Theory, Routledge, New York, NY,
pp. 31-50.
Wanderley, L.S.O., Lucian, R., Farache, F. and de Sousa Filho, J.M. (2008), “CSR information disclosure
on the web: a context-based approach analysing the influence of country of origin and industry
sector”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 369-378.
Waymer, D. and Heath, R.L. (2014), “Organisational legitimacy: the overlooked yet all-important CSR
foundation of OPR research”, PRism, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 1-10. communication
Woolfson, C. and Beck, M. (Eds) (2005), Corporate Social Responsibility Failures in the Oil Industry,
Baywood Publishing Company, New York, NY.
Yi, Y. (1990), “Cognitive and affective priming effects of the context for print advertisements”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 40-48.
Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and Malhotra, A. (2002), “Service quality delivery through web sites: a critical 19
review of extant knowledge”, Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 362-375.

Appendix 1. Scales
Perceived credibility by Lock and Seele (2017) (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree” – 5 ¼ “Strongly agree”)
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
(1) I think that the statements on the website are accurate.
(2) I think that the claims made on the website are correct.
(3) I am confident that the statements are true.
(4) I think that the website uses the best evidence at hand.
(5) The arguments are justified by the facts on the website.
(6) The website reflects the genuine intentions of the company.
(7) I think that the company’s intentions correspond with the website.
(8) The website is not misleading.
(9) The CSR website fits to the context of the fashion industry and its social and environmental
challenges.
(10) As a reader of this CSR website, I feel that the text addresses CSR issues well.
(11) I think the website rightfully represents the company.
(12) I understand the website.
(13) The website is clearly written.
(14) The website is written in an understandable way.
(15) I understand the meaning of the website.
(16) The website is easy to read.
CSR attitude by Obermiller and Spangenberg (1998) (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree” – 5 ¼ “Strongly agree”)
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
• I do not trust companies to deliver on their social responsibility promises.
• Companies are usually dishonest about their real involvement in social responsibility
initiatives.
• In general, I am not convinced that companies will fulfill their social responsibility objectives.
Industry attitude, on 5-point semantic scale.
• Good – bad
• Reliable – unreliable
• Ethical –unethical
• Fair – unfair
• Beneficial – harmful
CCIJ Clothing interest by Mehta and Sivadas (1995), five-point Likert-scale (1 ¼ “Strongly disagree” – 5 ¼
24,1 “Strongly agree”)
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
• I know much about clothes/fashion.
• I am generally regarded by my friends as a good source of advice about clothing/fashion.
20 • I am more interested in clothes/fashion relative to other people.
• I am always interested in receiving information on clothes/fashion.
Purchase intention, Yi (1990), five-point semantic scale
How likely is it that you would consider buying a product from the label?
• Very unlikely – very likely
• Impossible – possible
• Unlikely – likely

Appendix 2. Randomization check results

Table AI. F df Partial η2

Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) with group Age 2.217 3 (317) 0.021
as factor and age, Gender 1.019 3 (317) 0.010
gender, industry
Industry attitude 0.602 3 (317) 0.006
attitude, clothing
interest and CSR Clothing interest 0.508 3 (317) 0.005
attitude as CSR attitude 0.083 3 (317) 0.001
dependent variables Notes: All significance tests were conducted at an alpha-level of 0.05. *po 0.05

Corresponding author
Irina Lock can be contacted at: i.j.lock@uva.nl

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

Product-harm
The buffering effects of crisis
CSR reputation in times of
product-harm crisis
Yeonsoo Kim and Chang Wan Woo 21
James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia, USA
Received 9 February 2018
Revised 20 July 2018
17 September 2018
Abstract Accepted 22 September 2018
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of prior-CSR reputation in protecting a company’s
CSR reputation during product-harm crises and how it influences consumers’ crisis-related behavioral
intentions (i.e. supportive communication, resistance to negative information and crisis resiliency). The
authors test whether the impact of prior-CSR reputation differs by crisis type as well.
Design/methodology/approach – A randomized 2 (CSR reputation: good vs bad) × 2 (product-harm crisis
type: tampering vs preventable) full factorial design in two industry settings (food industry and retail
industry) with consumer samples was conducted.
Findings – The results revealed the determinant role of positive prior-CSR reputation in protecting
reputational assets. A company with positive CSR reputation experiences no decrease in its CSR reputation
during victim crises and fairly minor decreases during preventable crises. However, a company with a bad
prior-CSR reputation experiences a greater decline in its CSR reputation across both crises; the level of decline
during victim crises was as substantial as the decline experienced during a preventable crisis. The prior-CSR
reputation directly affects consumers’ crisis-related intentions, and indirectly does so through post-CSR
reputation. As post-CSR reputation becomes more positive, consumers display greater resistance to negative
information, supportive communication intent and crisis resiliency.
Originality/value – This study advances the understanding of the role of corporate reputation during crises
and provides additional empirical evidence of how the buffering effect of CSR can extend beyond
product-related intentions among consumers. The findings can induce companies to adopt CSR programs
more systematically and proactively under a long-term strategic plan.
Keywords CSR, Reputation, Crisis management, Buffering effects, Resistance to negative information,
Supportive communication
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Crises are virtually guaranteed to happen to every corporation in the course of business.
By way of example, a survey by Burson-Marsteller and Penn Schoen Berland (2013)
revealed that 44 percent of business managers have experienced a crisis within the past
year. In total, 56 percent believe a crisis is likely to happen in the following year, indicating
that many now recognize the inevitability of a crisis. Accordingly, the threat that a crisis
poses has become a serious concern for business managers. Commonly identified negative
effects of crises include not just tangible losses such as a decline in revenues and cutbacks or
layoffs (Coombs, 2015); they also include severe and sometimes fatal damage to intangible
assets: a tarnished reputation and a harsher business environment associated with the flood
of negative information and increased media scrutiny, government scrutiny and social
media discussion resulting from the crisis (Coombs, 2015). Needleless to say, knowing how
to mitigate the potential negative impacts of a crisis is crucial to a business’ survival.
To provide guidance, many prior studies have focused on how to shelter or restore
corporate intangible assets, especially reputational assets, through crisis response strategies
during or after a crisis (Kim et al., 2011). However, once a crisis occurs, damage can result
Corporate Communications: An
despite the best crisis management strategies. Companies need to know ways to mitigate International Journal
such risks prior to a crisis. “One means by which corporations can reduce the uncertainty Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 21-43
associated with a competitive and potentially hostile environment is by cultivating a © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
reservoir of goodwill” ( Jones et al., 2000, p. 28), and “reputation is the vessel in which DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-02-2018-0024
CCIJ goodwill accumulates” (p. 28). This study proposes establishing a solid corporate social
24,1 responsibility reputation (CSR reputation) prior to a crisis as a way to buffer the potentially
debilitating impacts of crises.
A favorable prior reputation is known to be an important asset during a crisis (Coombs
and Holladay, 2006; Fombrun and van Riel, 2003b; Sohn and Lariscy, 2014). Fombrun and
van Riel (2003b) noted that when a company has substantial reputational capital, it can
22 still maintain a favorable reputation after losing a portion of that capital during a crisis.
A favorable prior reputation can have a transferring effect that protects a company’s
reputation and associated assets from crisis-induced damage (Coombs and Holladay,
2006). Empirical studies have shown the value of a good prior reputation in times of crises
(e.g. Coombs and Holladay, 2001, 2015; Sohn and Lariscy, 2014; Klein and Dawar, 2004).
While prior research advanced our understanding of the value of corporate reputation
in times of crises, many tend to primarily focus on the impact of overall corporate
reputation and pay relatively less attention to the specific dimensional effects of
corporate reputation during crises.
However, a corporate reputation is a multidimensional construct that encompasses
several distinct components or dimensions such as a CSR reputation or corporate ability
reputation (Alniacik et al., 2012; De Castro et al., 2006). Consumers often have mixed
perceptions about a company. For example, consumers might think Walmart delivers a
wide range of products with very affordable prices (positive corporate ability), but
simultaneously they might evaluate the company as not socially responsible when it comes
to employee relations or community relations (negative CSR). Another scenario may be
when consumers associate a company with a positive reputation over one specific
dimension but other dimensions may not have noticeable established reputations. For
example, consumers might evaluate Toms Shoes as one of the most highly regarded socially
responsible companies, but they may not think the company delivers a wide variety of
quality shoes at affordable prices. While it is important to extend and confirm previous
studies’ findings in regard to an overall corporate reputation’s insurance-like effects during
crises, we believe that trying to explore the specific dimensional impact of reputation in
crisis situations is just as important. That is because corporate reputation requires several
years to be shaped and “strong reputation results when companies focus their actions and
communications around a single core theme” (Fombrun and Foss, 2001, p. 2). If the current
study’ findings demonstrate the value of CSR reputation during product-harm crises, the
findings will induce companies to adopt CSR programs more systematically and proactively
under a long-term strategic plan. The study’s findings can also be used as a stepping stone
for future studies that seek to explore reputational impact during crises when a company
has an opposite reputation across dimensions (e.g. a bad CSR reputation but a great
corporate ability reputation).
Indeed, in recognizing the complexity and multidimensionality of corporate reputation,
there have been several recent attempts to explore the specific dimensional impact of
reputation in crisis situations (e.g. Klein and Dawar, 2004). Some studies found that the
different dimensions of reputation have dissimilar impacts during a crisis (e.g. Kim, 2014;
Sohn and Lariscy, 2014). However, because the topic has been studied only sporadically, the
literature still lacks clear guidelines that companies can use (Vanhamme and Grobben,
2009). To explore other influences on the malleability of corporate reputation, scholars have
called for greater academic attention to the specific dimensional effects of prior corporate
reputation during crises (Kim, 2014).
Therefore, this study aims to deepen our understanding of the existing knowledge of the
value of reputation during crises, by exploring the effects of CSR reputation in times of
product-harm crises. More specifically, this study examines when companies have built a
favorable CSR reputation prior to a crisis and whether this carries a positive transferring
effect that protects companies from crisis-induced damage, and, in turn, positively affects Product-harm
consumers’ crisis-related intentions (supportive communication intent, resistance to crisis
negative information and crisis resiliency). By building upon existing research, we will be
able to provide insight on the question of whether CSR reputation can carry a similar
insurance-like benefit for companies in times of crises. The study advances our
understanding of the roles of corporate reputation during crises and provides additional
empirical evidence of how CSR’s buffering effect can extend beyond product-related 23
intentions among consumers. Corporate managers and communication specialists will find
the study findings useful while carefully planning their reputation management strategies,
especially related to CSR reputation.

Literature review
CSR reputation
A corporate reputation refers to cumulative assessments of a company that stakeholders
make regarding how well a company is meeting stakeholders’ expectations and how
successfully it is delivering the valued outcomes to its stakeholders (Fombrun, Gardberg
and Sever, 2000; Rindova and Fombrum, 1999; Coombs, 2012). A reputation is built over
time across different attributes or components of a company (Herbig and Milewicz, 1993),
and functions as a reliable estimation of the consistency of a corporation’s economic and
social performances (Herbig and Milewicz, 1993; Yoon et al., 1993). The importance of
corporate reputation lies in its value as “a key source of distinctiveness that produces
support for the company and differentiates it from rivals” (Fombrun and van Riel, 2003b,
p. 5), and as a top-level factor for organizations to achieve a sustained competitive
advantage (Sanchez and Sotorrio, 2007).
“Several authors highlight the complexity and the multidimensionality of corporate
reputation” (De Castro et al., 2006, p. 362). Reputation is a complex multi-faceted construct
with multiple pillars or dimensions (Hillenbrand and Money, 2007). For example, Fombrun
(1996) proposed ten compositions (e.g. social responsibility, managerial quality, financial
strength and innovation). De Castro et al. (2006) proposed that the construct consists of
business reputation and corporate social reputation. Fombrun and van Riel (2003a)
identified six pillars of reputation: emotional appeal, products/services, vision/leadership,
workplace environment, financial performance and social responsibility. The Reputation
Quotient (Fombrun et al., 2000), one of the well-cited measurements for corporate
reputation, defines the multidimensional construct composed of six dimensions, including
a social/environmental responsibility. These varying descriptions show the lack of
consensus on the definition of reputation, especially regarding conceptualizing the
construct’s dimensions. However, one thing is at least clear that CSR has become a key
component of corporate reputation.
It is plausible that when a consumer exhibits a favorable perception of a certain
company, the consumer evaluates the corporate ability to produce products as excellent yet
perceive its ethical conduct poorly, or vice versa. Due to the complexity of the construct of
reputation, exploring only overall corporate reputation across dimensions may risk
neglecting the specific dimensional impact of reputation. Indeed, some found that the
different dimensions of corporate associations have dissimilar impacts during a crisis
(e.g. Kim, 2014; Sohn and Lariscy, 2014). Thus, greater academic attention is needed to
define a specific aspect of corporate reputation and examine its effects during crises (Kim,
2014). In this instant study, we focus on CSR reputation, given that CSR has become a key
component of corporate reputation (Fombrun, Gardberg and Sever, 2000).
CSR generally refers to “an approach to business that embodies transparency and ethical
behavior, respect for stakeholder groups and a commitment to add economic, social and
environmental value” (Sustainability, 2004, p. 4). “The value of CSR to reputation is
CCIJ illustrated in the RepTrak reputation measure from the Reputation Institute and the value it
24,1 places upon CSR” (Coombs and Holladay, 2015, p. 144). According to Global CSR RepTrak®
by the Reputation Institute, a significant portion of a corporate reputation is based on a
company’ CSR efforts. RepTrak offers an excellent model for gauging CSR reputation,
reflecting common criteria suggested by Fombrun (1998) and Lewis (2001). The institute
assesses a CSR reputation through three sub-dimensions: citizenship, governance and
24 workplace. Citizenship emphasizes a corporation’s responsibilities as being a member of
greater society, while the governance dimension focuses more on whether the processes and
mechanisms of governing are open and responsible. Workplace refers to responsible
employee relations such as efforts to make the workplace fair, open and supportive. Based
on the forgoing discussion, this study defines CSR reputation as a cumulative evaluation of
corporate performance in demonstrating social responsibility in the areas of citizenship,
governance and workplace.

Effects of CSR reputation in times of crisis

Research on product-harm crises has identified two factors that significantly affect
consumers’ perceptions and post-crisis behavior: corporate crisis responses and prior
corporate reputation (Coombs and Holladay, 2001, 2006; Fombrun, Gardberg and Barnett,
2000; Kim et al., 2009; Lin et al., 2011; Sohn and Lariscy, 2014). When exploring the value of
CSR engagement in shielding corporate tangible and intangible assets during product-harm
crises, two lines of studies have been conducted centering on these factors (crisis responses
and prior reputation).
A number of studies have tested the effectiveness of CSR-focused messages as crisis
response strategies during or after crises (e.g. Kim et al., 2009; Kim, 2014; Vanhamme and
Grobben, 2009). The belief is that such messages can function as an effective bolstering
strategy by reminding consumers of charitable contributions or responsible works in which
a company has been involved. Some discover the beneficial utilities of CSR messages during
product-harm crises (Kim, 2014). Conversely, others find that the CSR approach is not
effective during or after product-harm crises because it may convey the wrong impression
to consumers that the company has misallocated its efforts (CSR engagement) when
corporate ability is the problem (Kim et al., 2009). Vanhamme and Grobben’s (2009) study
offers some clues to help understand the contradictory findings; “The use of CSR claims in
crisis communication is more effective for companies with a long CSR history than for those
with a short CSR history” (p. 273). In other words, a company’s positive history of integrity
and ethical conduct can generate a transferring effect and possibly affect the efficacy of
CSR-focused crisis responses in times of product-harm crisis. Without a long history of
involvement in CSR, utilizing CSR as a means to defend the company instead raises
consumer suspicions (Vanhamme and Grobben, 2009). In such cases, “CSR may not be an
automatic benefit” (Coombs and Holladay, 2015, p. 147).
This directs our attention to the role of CSR reputation given that CSR reputation should
be built over an extended period of time prior to a crisis.
The value of a good reputation has been widely recognized. A good reputation benefits
companies in tangible and intangible ways (Fombrun and Shanley, 1990; Roberts and
Dowling, 2002); it produces positive attitudes, greater loyalty and support from stakeholders,
and attracts employees (Roberts and Dowling, 2002). It increases investment intent and
recommendation intent among stakeholders (Kim and Choi, 2011) and enhances financial
performance (Sabate and Puente, 2003; Lai et al., 2010).
The positive influence of a good reputation is also discussed in crisis literature. Scholars
note that a prior reputation can function as a shield, and not only deflect possible damage
inflicted by a crisis but also help facilitate damage repair (Coombs and Holladay, 2001, 2006).
When a company has accumulated reputational capital, it can continue to maintain a
favorable post-crisis reputation after losing a portion of that capital (Alsop, 2004). The Product-harm
accumulated capital can further safeguard corporate intangible and tangible assets against crisis
loss by operating as a buffer (Fombrun, Gardberg and Barnett, 2000; Fombrun, Gardberg
and Sever, 2000). That is, a company with favorable reputational capital suffers much less
when a crisis strikes and recovers more quickly. Empirical studies have found supportive
evidence as well (e.g. Coombs and Holladay, 2001, 2015; Klein and Dawar, 2004).
Klein and Dawar’s (2004) study has shown that CSR can operate “as an insurance policy 25
against the negative impact of untoward events such as product-harm crises” (p. 204). They
introduced the term “halo effects” in the context of the effects of CSR in a product-harm
crisis. “A halo effect is the ‘bias’ due to a measure that spills over to another measure” (Klein
and Dawar, 2004, p. 204). For example, consumers’ positive beliefs about the product
performance of a certain brand, such as Porsche, can spillover to their evaluations of
different aspects of the brand (e.g. reliability of the car) (Beckwith and Lehmann, 1975). “The
halo effect is most conspicuous when the affected measures are unrelated to the source of
the halo” (Klein and Dawar, 2004, p. 204). In a study by Brown and Dacin (1997), the authors
found that consumers’ perception of CSR significantly influences their evaluation of a
company’s future products, which is not directly related to a company’s CSR performance.
Kim (2011) also found that a CSR communication strategy was effective at influencing not
only consumer CSR association (status of a company as a good member of society with
regard to social, environmental and/or political issues), but also their corporate ability
association (psychological associations with a company regarding their ability and
expertise to produce quality products/services). That is, CSR is often unrelated to a
company’s ability to produce goods and services, but creating stable and distinct linkages in
consumers’ minds between a company and its perceived holistic capabilities seems to have
strong “halo effects” or “transferring effects” onto consumers’ perception of unrelated areas
(e.g. corporate ability).
As noted above, the value of a favorable prior reputation has been widely recognized.
However, when it comes the halo effects of favorable reputation, prior studies on the matter
have been criticized as showing only that an unfavorable prior reputation hurts a company
in crisis, instead of proving that a favorable prior reputation shields a company from
damage (see Coombs and Holladay, 2006). By this logic, Klein and Dawar’s (2004) study
appears to have some limitations in its support of a halo effect, given that the neutral and
favorable reputation conditions did not differ from one another while unfavorable prior
reputation conditions had a significant impact on perceived crisis responsibility. When a
halo effect is defined as a psychological bias due to a pre-existing perception of a company
that can transfer to another aspect of a company, it is open to discussion whether the term
can be used only to refer a positive spillover effect, and not a negative transferring impact
from a negative perception. However, the halo effect seems to denote more positive effects in
previous literature, and it is thus important to review the other line of studies that focus
more on the negative impact of negative reputation or organizational history.
Coombs (1998) proposed that an organization’s performance history can significantly
affect individuals’ perceptions of a crisis and an organization in times of crisis. He divided
performance history into two dimensions, including crisis history and past relationship
history. Earlier studies have garnered relatively limited support for the impact of
performance history on crisis situations (Coombs, 1998; Coombs and Holladay, 1996).
However, a later study by Coombs and Holladay (2001) showed empirical evidence that an
organization’s performance history affects crisis situations (crisis responsibility, evaluation
of organizational reputation and potential supportive behavior). The findings suggest that
relationship history and crisis history have differing effects on crisis situations (Coombs and
Holladay, 2001). “Although both contributed similar explanations of variance for crisis
responsibility, relationship history explained nearly three times as much of the variance for
CCIJ organizational reputation than crisis history” (p. 335). Organizational reputation, in turn,
24,1 influences people’s potential supportive behaviors. More importantly, they discovered that
the effect of performance histories on perceived organizational reputation was generated by
negative performance histories. The authors term these negative results as the Velcro
effect – where a negative performance history “attracts and snags additional reputational
damage” (p. 335). This study has far-reaching implications in that it offers a model to
26 understand the dynamics of performance history, organizational reputation and perception
of crises, as well as suggesting a different perspective to look at the impact of organizational
history and reputation (Velcro effect; negative impact of negative performance history).
Adopting the above rationale (a transferring effect of prior reputation, not specifically
limited to the halo effect or the Velcro effect), this study proposes that a positive CSR
reputation that has been built prior to a crisis would protect a company from possible
damage to its reputation and further enhance consumers’ favorable communication-related
intentions (i.e. supportive communication, resistance to negative information), as well as
crisis resiliency. This means that on the flip side, a negative CSR reputation would add more
damage to a company, and further negatively influence consumer perceptions and
intentions. Scholars note that consumers typically desire to maintain a good relationship
with a socially responsible company and that this desire makes them reluctant to make
negative judgment calls (Luo and Bhattacharya, 2009; Eisingerich et al., 2011). Minor and
Morgan (2011) discovered a lesser change in corporate value for companies with intensive
CSR engagements. Consumers overlook or downplay negative information they receive
about a responsible company that they would like to be associated with (Alsop, 2002).
Positive CSR serves as a buffer and reduces the damage of negative publicity (Lin et al.,
2011; Eisingerich et al., 2011), especially if the negative information is about a company’s
ethical conduct. Proactive CSR engagements heighten individuals’ supportive intentions
causing them to engage in favorable word-of-mouth communication and information
seeking behavior (Kim, 2017). A good record of CSR is an effective means of boosting
stakeholders’ intent to display strong resilience in negative situations as well (Bhattacharya
and Sen, 2003). Based on the foregoing discussion, it is highly plausible that an established,
favorable prior-CSR reputation will have an overall positive impact on protecting a
company’s reputation, and enhancing positive, post-crisis consumer responses.
This study utilizes supportive communication intent, resistance to negative information
and crisis resiliency as indicators. During a crisis, negative publicity, public discourse and
information flood through various media channels such as social media. More often than
not, the diffusion of negative information is not within a company’s control (Eisingerich
et al., 2011). Thus, a negative information flow poses a serious threat to a company in crisis.
It is understandable why 70 percent of business leaders report that media is playing a
greater role in affecting reputation during a crisis, and 64 percent believe that new media,
including social media, make crises more difficult to manage and reputational resiliency
tougher to maintain (Burson-Marsteller and Penn Schoen Berland, 2013). However, few
studies have explored how a company can mitigate the damage from negative information
flows (Eisingerich et al., 2011). Crisis resiliency merits further examination as well, given
that recovery is the primary goal of businesses in times of crisis. The topic of consumers’
communication-related behavioral intent during crises is in great need of further research.
To test the main effects of prior-CSR reputation, we propose the following hypotheses:
H1. A company with a good prior-CSR reputation experiences a lesser decrease in
its CSR reputation during product-harm crises than a company with a bad
prior-CSR reputation.
H2. A good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater resistance to negative information
about a company among consumers compared to a bad CSR reputation.
 H3. A good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater supportive communication intent Product-harm
among consumers compared to a bad CSR reputation. crisis
H4. A good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater crisis resiliency among consumers,
compared to a bad CSR reputation.

Interaction effects of CSR reputation and crisis types 27

Crisis types. Situation crisis communication theory (SCCT) offers a useful theoretical
framework to understand and anticipate “how stakeholders will react to a crisis in terms of
the reputational threat posed by the crisis” and “how people will react to the crisis response
strategies used to manage the crisis” (Coombs, 2007, p. 163). Previous empirical research
based on SCCT has provided practical guidelines for crisis managers to determine which
crisis response strategies would be more useful to protect a corporate reputation from the
negative consequences of a crisis (Coombs, 2007). SCCT emphasizes that the crisis manager
should first understand the crisis situation and assess the level of reputational threat
induced by a crisis. Three important factors that shape the reputational threat level include
initial crisis responsibility, crisis history and prior relationship reputation (Coombs, 2007).
Initial crisis responsibility indicates how much stakeholders view the organization as
having caused the crisis (Coombs, 1995). Generally, the initial crisis assessment is based
upon the crisis type. Crisis history is whether a similar crisis has happened in the past
(Coombs and Holladay, 2002). “Either a history of crises or an unfavorable prior relational
reputation intensifies attributions of crisis responsibility thereby indirectly affecting the
reputational threat” (Coombs, 2007, p. 167).
This study focuses on a product-harm crisis. A product-harm crisis is a widely publicized
crisis that involves instances of defective or dangerous products (Dawar and Pillutla, 2000).
“Increasing complexity of products, more demanding customers, and more vigilant media are
making product–harm crises an even more visible occurrence” (Klein and Dawar, 2004, p. 205).
A product-harm crisis is one of the most common crises that companies face (Davidson
andWorrell 1992), and is considered to have the greatest impact on corporate reputational
assets (Burson-Marsteller and Penn Schoen Berland, 2013). Product-harm crises often draw
substantial media attention resulting in increased negative publicity (Lin et al., 2011). When
product-harm crises are mishandled, a company cannot avoid serious harm (Carley and Lin,
1995; Perrow, 1984). “The seriousness and frequency of product–harm crises contrast with the
relative paucity of research in this area” (Klein and Dawar, 2004, p. 205).
According to the SCCT, product-harm crises can be categorized into three clusters
depending on crisis responsibility: the victim cluster (weak attributions of crisis
responsibility), the accidental cluster (minimal attributions of crisis responsibility) and
the intentional preventable cluster (very strong attributions of crisis responsibility) (Coombs
and Holladay, 2002). Facing product-harm crises, individuals tend to engage in an
attribution process to determine the direction of their thoughts or reactions regarding a
given crisis. Each cluster produces predictable attribution of crisis responsibility,
and in turn affects the extent of reputational damage (Coombs, 2015). Victim crises
(e.g. malevolence product tampering) produce little blame to the company, while preventable
crises (e.g. corporate misdeeds) produce strong attributions of crisis responsibility. Accident
crises (e.g. technical error accidents) produce relatively low attributions. Researchers often
compare victim crises and preventable crises to explore different consumer reactions due to
the clear distinctions between the two (e.g. Kim, 2014). When individuals attribute a crisis to
a company and hold it liable for the crisis, it leads to greater reputational damage and
negative consumer responses (Dean, 2004; Ducassy, 2013; Klein and Dawar, 2004). Thus,
crisis type should be considered to better analyze consumers’ crisis responses.
CCIJ Interaction effects
24,1 This study argues that the effects of CSR reputation can be accelerated or inhibited by
crisis type (victim vs preventable). Two competing scenarios are addressed in the previous
studies exploring the reputational impact of different crisis types. As the main theoretical
framework, the confirmatory bias effect and the expectation violations theory were
applied. The confirmatory bias effect explains that “consumers are motivated to engage in
28 the biased processing of new information to yield preferred conclusions” (Dean, 2004,
p. 197). People avoid what does not support their previous expectations and favor what
supports their expectations. Accordingly, consumers are more likely to ignore or
discount negative information and draw positive conclusions if a company is positively
perceived (e.g. favorable CSR reputation), whereas consumers augment negative
information to draw less positive conclusions for a negatively perceived company. The
rationales are supported by empirical data (Dean, 2004). Dean (2004) added that the main
impact of pre-existing perceptions is strong, even when the situation produces conflicting
information. In other words, the destructive effects of negative CSR reputation can appear
even when a company is not liable for a crisis (victim crisis). The positive effects of a
favorable CSR reputation would appear even when a company is liable for a crisis
(preventable crisis).
By contrast, the expectancy violations theory suggests that when individual’s
expectations are violated, the violation activates individuals’ cognitive processes to
evaluate the violator. The evaluations tend to be negative (positive) if the violation is
negative (positive) (Burgoon and LePoire, 1993). A corporate crisis can be regarded as a
negative violation of consumer expectancy (Kim, 2014), and negatively influence the
evaluation of a company. The negative impact would be heightened if a company has a
positive prior reputation according to the expectancy violations theory. Applying this
logic, Sohn and Lariscy (2014) argued that a positive prior reputation backfires when the
company is liable for a crisis. Consumers hold high expectations toward a reputable
company, so any negative violations (crisis) can cause greater damage to a
reputable company as opposed to a not-reputable company. However, it is important to
note that when a company has a positive CSR reputation, consumers’ expectations
toward a company’s ability to produce good quality products are not necessarily high.
A product-harm crisis is more of a violation of a corporate ability, not a violation of
corporation’s integrity or ethical conduct (Kim, 2014). Thus, the expectancy violations
theory may not have the best utility in the present study. For these reasons, this study
adopts the confirmatory bias effects as a theoretical framework.
We propose that the impact of a favorable CSR reputation would be greater in a victim
crisis (heightened buffering effects), while the positive effect would be reduced in a
preventable crisis (limited buffering effects) but not to the extent of producing backlash
effects. On the other hand, a company with a negative CSR reputation would face
substantial damage even with a victim crisis due to the determinant power of prior-CSR
reputation – similar to the extent of a preventable crisis. To test the ordinal interaction
effects, the following hypotheses are derived:
H5. A company with a good prior-CSR reputation experiences a lesser decline in its CSR
reputation over the course of a victim crisis than a preventable crisis; a company
with a bad prior-CSR reputation experiences a greater decline in its CSR reputation
similarly across both victim and preventable crises.
H6. When a company with a good CSR reputation faces a victim crisis, consumers show
greater resistance to negative information than when it faces a preventable crisis;
however, consumers show low resistance across both crises for a company with a
bad CSR reputation.
 H7. When a company with a good CSR reputation faces a victim crisis, consumers show Product-harm
greater supportive communication intent than when it faces a preventable crisis; crisis
however, consumers show low resistance across both crises for a company with a
bad CSR reputation.
H8. When a company with a good CSR reputation faces a victim crisis, consumers show
greater crisis resiliency than when it faces a preventable crisis; however, consumers
show low resistance across both crises for a company with a bad CSR reputation. 29

Roles of post-crisis CSR reputation

Finally, this study tests the relationship between post-crisis CSR reputation and consumer
crisis responses. As discussed previously, when a company has substantial reputation capital
to spend, it can afford to lose some portion and still maintain a favorable post-crisis reputation
(Fombrun and van Riel, 2003b). Sufficient post-crisis reputational capital is believed to help a
company rebound quickly after a crisis (Coombs and Holladay, 2015). However, some may
raise the question of whether a crisis-influenced, once-damaged (regardless of the extent)
post-crisis CSR reputation can still function as a reliable and trustworthy indicator of a
company’s social performance. Once again adopting the confirmatory bias effects, we expect
that a positive post-crisis reputation will still hold significant value and assist the damage
repair process by influencing consumers’ resistance to negative information, supportive
communication and crisis resiliency. The following hypotheses are suggested (Figure 1):
H9. As post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers display greater resistance
to negative information.
H10. As post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers display greater
supportive communication intent.
H11. As post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers display greater
crisis resiliency.

Methods
The study employed a randomized 2 (CSR reputation: good vs bad) × 2 (product-harm crisis
type: tampering vs preventable) full factorial design in two industry settings (food industry
and retail industry) to examine the suggested hypotheses. We chose to test the effects of
CSR reputation and crisis types in different industries to enhance the external validity of the
study findings.

Behavioral Intents

Supportive
communication

CSR reputation (Good vs Resistance to negative

Bad) prior to a crisis Post-crisis CSR information
reputation

Crisis Resiliency
Figure 1.
Effects of prior-CSR
Crisis Type (Victim vs reputation factoring
Preventable) crisis type
CCIJ Stimuli
24,1 For stimuli, four companies were selected through a pretest using college students (n ¼ 83):
Target and Walmart are used to represent the retail industry and Panera and McDonald’s
are used to represent the food industry. For the pretest, the researchers initially chose ten
companies (Panera, Subway, McDonald’s, Starbucks, Chick-Fil-A, Whole Foods, Costco,
Target, Sam’s Club and Walmart) from the two industries. We reviewed the Reputation
30 Institute’s (2017) RepTrak Pulse Ranking and various consumer reports and news articles
regarding the least and the most socially responsible companies (e.g. the ten companies with
the best CSR reputations in 2017 by Forbes) to select the ten companies that have relatively
distinctive CSR-related reputations. Then, the pretest tested consumers’ evaluations of
the ten companies’ CSR reputation. The CSR reputation measures are explained in
the measurements section. Based on the pretest results, we purposely selected the
aforementioned four companies (Target vs Walmart and Panera vs McDonald) because the
chosen pairs are in the same sector (e.g. fast-food industry) and have clearly distinctive CSR
reputations (good vs bad). Some prior studies use fictitious companies or real companies
with neutral CSR reputations for their stimuli to manipulate CSR reputation so that other
factors (e.g. pre-existing attitudes) do not interfere with the results of the experiment.
However, employing this method has its critical limitations by neglecting the fact that a
reputation is generally built over time, which is how it carries a strong value in consumers’
minds. Despite the importance of using real companies, doing so of course poses difficulties
in controlling for possible interference. To address this issue, several techniques were
utilized, including matching familiarity and statistical controls, to control for
pre-existing attitudes. The randomized distribution of participants into different
conditions should have also helped to reduce systematic errors from interfering factors.
Familiarity was measured by a seven-point polar adjective scale (1 – not at all familiar vs
7 – extremely familiar) (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006). By matching consumers’ familiarity with
the chosen companies, researchers have attempted to control for the subjects’ familiarity by
using real companies. The results showed that two pairs of companies were evaluated as
similarly familiar: Target and Walmart (Mtarget ¼ 5.21, SD ¼ 1.8 vs Mwalmart ¼ 4.78,
SD ¼ 1.85, t ¼ 0.95, ns), and Panera and McDonald’s (Mpanera ¼ 5.14, SD ¼ 1.73 vs
MMcdonald’s ¼ 4.61, SD ¼ 1.70, t ¼ 1.8, ns).
In order to manipulate crisis type, real cases of product-harm crises in the food and retail
industries were researched. An E. Coli Outbreak was chosen to manipulate a preventable
product-harm case, while cyanide poisoning was selected to manipulate a product
tampering case.
In total, 16 news articles were created as stimuli: each condition has two stimuli (i.e. CSR
reputation stimulus and product-harm crisis stimulus). Although researchers carefully
selected companies that can represent good or bad CSR reputation based on secondary data,
we believe that using a stimulus would secure a clear distinction of CSR reputation between
the chosen companies. The stimuli of CSR reputation describes the selected company as the
most (or least) responsible company in the previous year based on three dimensions
including corporate governance, corporate citizenship and the workplace. In addition, a
table containing letter grades for CSR attributes (transparent corporate governance,
environmental sustainability, community involvement, corporate giving and excellence in
the workplace) was presented. The source of the table was described as a corporate
reputation center to increase source credibility. All other elements aside from CSR
reputation were the same across stimuli. The stimuli for the product-harm crises contained
information on either an E. Coli Outbreak (preventable) or cyanide poisoning (tampering).
For the preventable product-harm crisis, the stimuli described the multistate outbreak of
E. Coli infections as being linked to the company’s unsanitary conditions and improper
refrigeration system during distribution. The infected food items were described as being
stored at an improper temperature and distributed nationwide, causing the cardboard Product-harm
packaging of meats to harbor bacteria, and the company’s facilities clearly showed health crisis
code violations. For a product-harm crisis, cyanide poisoning was reported to have occurred
at one of the company’s largest meat suppliers. The primary suspect was thought to have
mixed potassium cyanide into the meat product in an attempt to get his supervisor into
trouble. Police are still investigating the incident and are interviewing supply facility
managers for further information. The extent of the crisis was the same across stimuli: the 31
incident killed 3 and sickened 418. The crisis stimuli were made based on real crisis news
articles regarding E. Coli infections and food tampering.
The second pretest checked the manipulation of stimuli (N ¼ 71). When respondents
accessed the experiment site, the site randomly assigned respondents to one of the eight
conditions. They first read a stimulus about CSR reputation, and another stimulus regarding
crisis type. They were asked to answer manipulation check questions including believability
of stimuli, perceived CSR reputation and recall of crisis type. Believability was checked using
a three-item seven-point semantic differential scale (Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.93): unconvincing/
convincing, unbelievable/believable and not credible/credible (MacKenzie and Lutz, 1989).
Respondents were also asked to recall the attribution of responsibility of the crisis in the news
article (whether the company is responsible or someone other than the company is
responsible). The pretest results revealed no significant differences in terms of stimuli
believability across conditions, and participants perceived the stimuli as generally believable
(M ¼ 5.71, SD ¼ 1.5). Perceived CSR reputation varied as expected (Mgood ¼ 6.55, SD ¼ 0.88 vs
Mbad ¼ 2.1, SD ¼ 1.02; F (1, 70) ¼ 829.22, po0.001, η2 ¼ 0.78). Most respondents recalled the
type of crisis correctly based on their recall of the attribution of responsibility of the crisis
(N ¼ 68, 95.77 percent). Because the manipulation was successful, the study used the
developed stimuli for the actual experiment.

Data collection
This study defines its population as general consumers. Consumer samples were
constructed through two means: consumer panels and college students. First, half of the
participants were recruited from diverse courses at a large university in the Northeastern
USA. Young adults aged 18–25 years old are one of the major target publics for the chosen
companies: Walmart, Target, McDonald’s and Panera. They make decisions for food
consumption daily and eat in restaurants more frequently than other age groups (Harris
et al., 2010). Young adults are a crucial segment for retailers not only because they make
purchase decisions independently, but because they have a significant influence on family
spending (Waters, 2006). Young adults are active agenda-builders through different online
platforms and thus become significant influencers in times of crisis. Understanding their
communication-relevant behavioral intentions is critical for companies to engage in damage
repair. In addition, college students provide good samples for researching a hypothesized
relationship between variables (Basil, 1996). Second, the other half of the participants were
recruited through a research firm specializing in online panels. Despite the important
aspects of using college students as samples, some may nonetheless pose external validity
issues for the study. To reduce such potential issues and obtain a broader sample of general
consumers for the chosen industry, this study also recruited consumer panelists from
various age brackets managed by Qualtrics. A series of analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests
were performed to examine whether there were main effects or interaction effects of sample
type with other independent variables on the dependent variables. The tests revealed that
there were no significant main effects or interaction effects on sample type. The
homogeneity of variances between the two groups was evaluated through a Levene’s test
and no significant results were found. These results indicate that there were no significant
differences between college student samples and consumer panel samples in this study.
CCIJ A total of 227 respondents participated in the online experiment. The average age of
24,1 participants was 30.28 (SD ¼ 15.97), ranging from 18 years old to 73 years old. There were
more female participants (n ¼ 169, 74.4 percent) than male participants (n ¼ 58, 25.6 percent).
In terms of ethnicity and race, most participants were of non-Hispanic origin (n ¼ 219,
96.5 percent). The majority of the participants were white (n ¼ 183, 80.6 percent),
21 participants were African-American or black (9.3 percent), 16 participants were Asian
32 (7 percent) and 1 participant was American Indian or Alaska Native (0.4 percent).
The distribution of participants was fairly even across conditions. A total of 59 participants
(26 percent) were assigned to a good CSR reputation and victim crisis case, 56 participants
(24.7 percent) were assigned to a good CSR reputation and preventable crisis case,
50 participants (22 percent) were assigned to a bad CSR reputation and victim crisis
case, and 62 participants (27.3 percent) were assigned to a bad CSR reputation and
preventable crisis case.
Researchers sent invitation e-mails to online panelists as well as college students. Once
individuals clicked the invitation link, read and agreed to an informed consent document, and
decided to participate in the study, the experiment site used a simple randomization function
to assign participants to one of eight conditions (CSR reputation × crisis type × industries).
Before being exposed to the stimuli, participants were asked to answer questions about CSR
reputation and pre-existing attitudes toward three companies (the chosen company for the
experimental condition and two additional companies including Starbucks and Costco).
Asking participants to evaluate not just the selected company for the condition, but also
additional companies, was done to divert participants’ attention because they were asked to
rate the selected company’s CSR reputation after their exposure to the stimuli. Pre-existing
attitudes were measured because we planned to use it as a control variable. Then, a stimulus
article (CSR reputation) for the given condition appeared for participants to read and
perceived CSR reputation of the given company was measured afterwards. They were asked
to answer a manipulation check question for the first stimulus. Other stimulus articles for the
given condition (crisis type) appeared for participants to read. After reading, participants were
given another manipulation check question for the stimulus. They were asked to answer
questions about post-crisis CSR reputation, resistance to negative information, supportive
communication intent and crisis resiliency, in addition to demographic information.

Measures
CSR reputation. We adapted the Reputation Institute’s RepTrak Pulse measures to assess
CSR reputation. The RepTrak Pulse uses three key pillars to assess CSR reputation
(i.e. governance, citizenship and workplace) (Reputation Institute, 2017). The index in
RepTrak uses a single item to assess a sub-dimension of CSR reputation (governance,
citizenship and workplace). We modified the index by adding items for each dimension so
that the constructed measurement can use multiple indicators to measure CSR reputation.
Five seven-point Likert scale items (1 – strongly disagree, 7 – strongly agree) were used for
corporate governance (Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.95), four items were used for citizenship
(Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.97) and six items were utilized for workplace dimension (Cronbach’s
α ¼ 0.98). Table I explains the items in further detail. Cronbach’s αcoefficient was examined
to assess reliability and internal consistency of each dimension (governance: 0.95,
citizenship: 0.97 and workplace: 0.98). A confirmatory factor analysis tested the CSR
reputation construct and constituted of 15 items in 3 dimensions. The results revealed that
the proposed construct model has an excellent fit and all of the indicators significantly
contribute to the construct (NFI ¼ 0.97, CFI ¼ 0.99, RMSEA ¼ 0.036). All of the estimates for
average variances extracted (AVEs) were greater than 0.7 (governance: 0.77, citizenship:
0.71 and workplace: 0.73). No reliability concerns were raised. Composite reliability (CR) was
 Factor Cronbach’s
Product-harm
Variables Measure items loadings α crisis
CSR reputationa
Governance The company is open and transparent 0.86 95
The company is sincere and trustworthy 0.89
The company behaves ethically 0.84
The company is compassionate 0.93 33
The company is socially responsible 0.88
Citizenship The company cares about society’s welfare more than other 0.82 0.97
companies do
I believe that the company cares about how it impacts society 0.88
The company tries to be a good corporate citizen 0.91
The company contributes to society (e.g. protect the 0.78
environment, support for causes)
Workplace The company treats their employees well 0.85 0.98
The company encourages their employees to develop their 0.85
skills and careers
The management of the company is primarily concerned with 0.84
employees’ needs and wants
The company implements flexible policies to provide a good 0.82
work and life balance for its employees
The managerial decisions related with the employees are 0.89
usually fair
The company supports employees who want to acquire 0.89
additional education
Resistance to I would hesitate to trust unfavorable media coverage 0.80
negative information regarding the issue
I would be unreceptive to the negative information about the
company
I would value what the company has to say about the issue
Supportive I would say nice things about this company to others 0.99
communication I would talk positively about this company to others
I would recommend this company to others
I would be supportive when talking about this company
Crisis resiliency I would forgive the company when it makes mistakes 0.91
I would forgive the company for the issue described in the
news article
I am confident that the company would improve for the better
based on this difficult situation
I would trust the company would do the right thing Table I.
Notes: aNFI ¼ 0.97, CFI ¼ 0.99, RMSEA ¼ 0.036, Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.96 Measures

larger than 0.7 for all of the dimensions (governance: 0.94, citizenship: 0.91 and workplace:
0.94) and CRs had a larger than AVE, in support of convergent validity. Maximum shared
variance of each dimension was smaller than its AVE (governance: 0.69, citizenship: 0.69
and workplace: 0.46), and the square root of AVEs was greater than inter-dimension
correlations, thereby satisfying the discriminant validity criterion (Hair et al., 2010).
Resistance to negative information. Resistance to negative information was measured by
using three seven-point Likert scale items (1 – strongly disagree, 7 – strongly agree):
“I would be unreceptive to the negative information about the company,” “I would value
what the company has to say about the issue” and “I would hesitate to trust unfavorable
media coverage regarding the issue” (Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.80). We adopted similar items from a
previous study (Eisingerich et al., 2011) and modified the items to be more suitable for
product-harm crises. For example, we changed the wording of the reverse code item
CCIJ “I readily change my view of [company name] based on negative information about it” to
24,1 “I would be unreceptive to the negative information about the company.”
Supportive communication intent. Supportive communication intent was measured with
four seven-point Likert scale items adopted from a previous study (Kim, 2017): “I would say
nice things about this company to others,” “I would talk positively about this company to
others,” “I would recommend this company to others” and “I would be supportive when
34 talking about this company” (1 – strongly disagree, 7 – strongly agree; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.99).
Crisis resiliency. Crisis resiliency was measured using four seven-point Likert scale items,
based on Bhattacharya and Sen’s (2003) study: “I would forgive the company when it makes
mistakes,” “I would forgive the company for the issue,” “I am confident that the company
would change for the better based on this difficult situation” and “I would trust the company
would do the right thing” (Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.91).
Attitude. As a control variable, general attitude toward a given company was assessed.
Three items on a seven-point semantic differential scale were used (Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.96):
bad/good, unpleasant/pleasant and unfavorable/favorable (MacKenzie and Lutz, 1989). To
reduce potential contamination from pre-existing perception of the chosen companies, we
controlled for the participants’ attitudes toward the companies (Table I).

Results
Manipulation checks revealed that participants exposed to a good CSR reputation
(M ¼ 6.58, SD ¼ 0.79) perceived the reputation significantly better (F (1, 226) ¼ 1,562.25,
p o0.001, η2 ¼ 0.87) than those exposed to a bad CSR reputation (M ¼ 1.66, SD ¼ 1.05). Most
participants recalled the type of crisis correctly (N ¼ 222, 97.8 percent). In terms of
believability of stimuli, no significant difference was found among conditions, and the
means of stimuli were above the mid-point of the seven-point scale (CSR reputation:
M ¼ 5.47, SD ¼ 1.40, crisis type: M ¼ 5.72, SD ¼ 1.28). That is, manipulations produced the
intended effects and participants perceived stimuli as similarly believable across conditions.
Prior to testing the hypotheses, a series of ANOVA tests were performed to examine
whether there were main effects or interaction effects of industry type with other
independent variables on dependent variables. The tests revealed that there were no
significant main effects or interaction effects of business sectors. The homogeneity of
variances between groups in different industries was evaluated through a Levene’s test and
no significant results were found. These results indicate that the effects of CSR reputation
and crisis type were universal across business sectors. Thus, the researcher conducted
further inferential statistical analyses after merging groups across the two industries.

Testing hypotheses
H1 proposes that a company with a good prior-CSR reputation experiences a lesser decline
in its CSR reputation during product-harm crises than a company with a bad prior-CSR
reputation. Because H5 tests the interaction effect of a CSR reputation and crisis type on the
same dependent variable (decline in CSR reputation), a two-way ANCOVA test was
performed to determine whether significant interaction effects exist, while controlling for
general attitudes toward the company. H5 posits that a company with a good prior-CSR
reputation experiences a lesser decline in CSR reputation over the course of a victim crisis
than a preventable crisis; a company with a bad prior-CSR reputation experiences a greater
decline in its CSR reputation similarly across both victim crises and preventable crises.
The decline in CSR reputation was calculated first. The two-way ANCOVA test revealed a
significant interaction effect between prior-CSR reputation and crisis type on decline in CSR
reputation (F (1, 226) ¼ 10.13, p o0.005, η2 ¼ 0.04). Follow-up tests verified the simple main
effects of a prior-CSR reputation on decline in CSR reputation across different
crisis conditions. After segregating the data by prior-CSR reputation, an ANCOVA test was Product-harm
performed. As Figure 2 shows, when a company with a good prior-CSR reputation faces a crisis
victim crisis, compared to a preventable crisis, it experiences a significantly lesser decline in
its CSR (F (1, 114) ¼ 20.35, p o0.001, η2 ¼ 0.15). On the other hand, a company with a bad
prior-CSR reputation experiences a dramatic decline in its CSR reputation across both victim
and preventable crises. Thus, H5 was supported. Significant main effects of prior reputation
on decline of CSR reputation was also found (F (1, 226) ¼ 172.96, p o0.001, η2 ¼ 0.44). The 35
results revealed that companies with a good prior-CSR reputation experienced a
significantly lesser decline in CSR reputation, while bad prior-CSR reputation companies
experienced much deeper decreases across both conditions. Thus, H1 was supported
(Tables II and III and Figure 2).

1.00 CrisisType
Victim
Preventable

0.50 0.53
Decrease in CSR Reputation

0.00

–0.25

–0.50

–1.00

–1.50
–1.59
–1.67
Figure 2.
Interaction effects of
–2.00 prior-CSR reputation
and crisis type on
decline in CSR
Good CSR Reputation Bad CSR Reputation
reputation
Prior-CSR Reputation

Decrease in CSR Resistance to negative Supportive communication Crisis

reputation information intent resiliency

Good CSR reputation

Victim 0.53 (0.79) 4.56 (1.04) 5.44 (1.34) 5.43 (0.92)
Preventable −0.25 (1.04) 4.30 (1.29) 5.04 (1.15) 5.16 (1.23)
Total 0.15 (1.0) 4.43 (1.17) 5.08 (1.39) 5.30 (1.08)
Bad CSR reputation
Victim −1.67 (1.10) 3.56 (1.17) 2.85 (1.43) 3.96 (1.12)
Preventable −1.59 (1.07) 3.56 (1.44) 2.53 (1.33) 3.59 (1.30)
Total −1.62 (1.08) 3.45 (1.32) 2.67 (1.38) 3.75 (1.23)
Table II.
Total Means (standard
Victim −0.47 (1.45) 4.1 (1.20) 4.25 (1.89) 4.75 (1.24) deviations) of
Preventable −0.95 (1.25) 3.92 (1.42) 3.56 (1.73) 4.33 (1.28) consumer responses
CCIJ H2 posits that a good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater resistance to negative
24,1 information about a company among consumers compared to a bad CSR reputation.
A two-way ANCOVA test was conducted to examine possible interaction effects proposed
in H6, while controlling for general attitudes toward the company. No interaction effect was
found. The test revealed significant main effects of prior-CSR reputation on consumer intent
regarding resistance to negative information about a company across different crisis
36 conditions (F (1, 226) ¼ 27.66, p o0.001, η2 ¼ 0.11). Participants under a good prior-CSR
reputation showed significantly greater intent regarding resistance to negative information,
than those under a bad prior-CSR reputation (Mgood ¼ 4.43, SD ¼ 1.17 vs Mbad ¼ 3.45,
SD ¼ 1.32) as Table II shows. H2 was supported and H6 was not supported.
H3 tests whether a good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater supportive
communication intent among consumers compared to a bad CSR reputation. A two-way
ANCOVA test was performed to determine whether significant interaction effects between
prior reputation and crisis type on supportive communication intent exist as proposed in
H7. The test was conducted while controlling for general attitudes toward the company.
No interaction effects were found. However, significant main effects of prior reputation
(F (1, 226) ¼ 180.33, po 0.001, η2 ¼ 0.45) and significant main effects of crisis type
(F (1, 226) ¼ 10.21, p o0.005, η2 ¼ 0.05) were found. A good prior-CSR reputation resulted in
stronger supportive communication intent among consumers compared to bad CSR
reputation (Mgood ¼ 5.08, SD ¼ 1.39 vs Mbad ¼ 2.67, SD ¼ 1.38). Victim crisis produced more
favorable supportive intent than preventable crises (Mvictim ¼ 4.25, SD ¼ 1.89 vs
Mpreventable ¼ 3.56, SD ¼ 1.73). Thus, H3 was supported and H7 was not supported.
H4 tests whether a good prior-CSR reputation leads to greater crisis resiliency among
consumers, compared to a bad CSR reputation. A two-way ANCOVA test was conducted to
determine possible interaction effects proposed in H8, while controlling for general attitudes
toward the company. No interaction effects were found. Significant main effects of CSR
reputation and significant main effects of crisis type were found instead. Consumers
exhibited significantly greater crisis resiliency when a company had a positive CSR
reputation than a bad CSR reputation in general (Mgood ¼ 5.30, SD ¼ 1.08 vs Mbad ¼ 3.75,
SD ¼ 1.23; F (1, 226) ¼ 98.21, p o0.001, η2 ¼ 0.31). Consumers also showed significantly
greater crisis resiliency when a company experienced a victim crisis than a preventable
crisis (Mvictim ¼ 4.75, SD ¼ 1.24 vs Mpreventable ¼ 4.33, SD ¼ 1.48; F (1, 226) ¼ 4.94, p o0.05,
η2 ¼ 0.02). Thus, H4 was supported and H8 was not supported.
H9 proposes that as post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers will display
greater resistance to negative information. A regression test was performed. As Table IV
shows, the results revealed that as post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers
display greater resistance to negative information ( β ¼ 0.66, po 0.001). Thus, H9 was
supported. H10 proposes that as post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers
display greater supportive communication intent. A regression test revealed that as
post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, respondents display stronger supportive
communication intent ( β ¼ 0.88, p o0.001), thereby supporting H10. H11 proposes that as

Decrease in Resistance to Supportive

CSR reputation negative information communication intent Crisis resiliency

Prior-CSR reputation F (1, 226) ¼ 172.96*** F (1, 226) ¼ 27.66*** F (1, 226) ¼ 180.33*** F (1, 226) ¼ 98.21***
Table III. Crisis type F (1, 226) ¼ 6.84* F (1, 226) ¼ 0.85 F (1, 226) ¼ 10.21** F (1, 226) ¼ 4.94*
Effects of CSR CSR reputation ×
reputation and crisis type F (1, 226) ¼ 10.13** F (1, 226) ¼ 0.14 F (1, 226) ¼ 0.35 F (1, 226) ¼ 0.52
crisis type Notes: *p o0.05; **p o0.01; ***p o 0.001
post-crisis CSR reputation is more positive, consumers display greater crisis resiliency. Product-harm
Another regression test revealed that as respondents evaluate post-crisis CSR reputation crisis
more positively, they showed stronger crisis resiliency ( β ¼ 0.80, p o0.001). Thus, H11 was
supported (Tables IV and V ).

Discussion
This study examines the role of prior-CSR reputation in protecting a company’s CSR 37
reputation during product-harm crises and how it influences consumers’ crisis-related
behavioral intentions (i.e. supportive communication, resistance to negative information
and crisis resiliency). We test whether the impact of prior-CSR reputation differs by crisis
type as well. An experiment of 2 (prior reputation: good vs bad) × 2 (crisis: victim vs
preventable) × 2 (retail and food industry) with consumer samples was conducted to test
the proposed hypothesis.
The results revealed the substantial role of positive prior-CSR reputation in protecting
reputational assets against losses during product-harm crises. Overall, when a company has
a good prior-CSR reputation, the decrease in its CSR reputation during product-harm crises
was significantly less severe compared to a company with a bad CSR reputation. Besides the
main effects of prior-CSR reputation, we found insightful interaction effects between
prior-CSR reputation and crisis types. A company with positive CSR reputation experiences
no decrease in its CSR reputation during victim crises, and consumers seem to evaluate its
post-crisis CSR reputation even higher than before. A positive CSR reputation company still
encounters decreases in CSR reputation in the case of preventable crises, but the decreases
seem to be fairly minor, compared to those of poor CSR reputation companies. The findings
support and extend the notion that positive reputational capital can safeguard corporate
assets against loss by operating as a buffer (Fombrun, Gardberg and Barnett, 2000;
Fombrun, Gardberg and Sever, 2000; Minor, 2010). Positive buffering effects appear even
when the company is liable for a preventable crisis.

Resistance to negative information Supportive communication intent Crisis resiliency

β β β
Table IV.
Post-CSR reputation 0.66*** 0.88*** 0.80*** Effects of post-crisis
Notes: *p o0.05; **p o 0.01; ***p o 0.001 CSR reputation

Hypothesis

H1: prior-CSR reputation → decrease in CSR reputation Supported

H2: prior-CSR reputation → resistance to negative information Supported
H3: prior-CSR reputation → supportive communication intent Supported
H4: prior-CSR reputation → crisis resiliency Supported
H5: prior-CSR reputation × crisis type → decrease in CSR reputation Supported
H6: prior-CSR reputation × crisis type → resistance to negative information Not supported
H7: prior-CSR reputation × crisis type → supportive communication intent Not supported
H8: prior-CSR reputation × Crisis type → crisis resiliency Not supported
H9: post-CSR reputation → resistance to negative information Supported
H10: post-CSR reputation → supportive communication Supported Table V.
H11: post-CSR reputation → crisis resiliency Supported Hypothesis
Notes: The table simplifies the suggested hypotheses for readers tests results
CCIJ The determinant roles of prior-CSR reputation impact bad reputation companies as well, but
24,1 in a completely opposite way. A company with a bad prior-CSR reputation experiences a
greater decline in its CSR reputation across both crises cases. Important to note here is that
the level of decline during victim crises in which the company was not liable for the crisis
(victim crisis) was as substantial as the decline experienced during a preventable crisis.
That means the effects of negative CSR reputation are very strong, to the point that once
38 product-harm crises happen, serious reputational damage can be done notwithstanding the
causes of product-harm crises. This stronger negative impact of bad CSR was observed in a
study by Klein and Dawar (2004), who concluded that “a poor record on social responsibility
can be asymmetrically damaging relative to the credit a firm receives for a good record”
(p. 203). Coombs and Holladay (2015) proposed that a company’s social irresponsibility can
lead to serious challenges or risky situations for a company brought by stakeholders such
as consumers. One of the risky situations may include a much harsher hit (reputational
capital loss) when product-harm crises occur, even when the company would otherwise be
regarded as a victim.
We found that the prior-CSR reputation also directly affects consumers’ crisis-related
intentions (i.e. supportive communication, resistance to negative information and crisis
resiliency). When a company has a good prior-CSR reputation, consumers show
significantly more favorable communication-related intentions (i.e. supportive
communication, resistance to negative information) as well as more positive intentions
regarding crisis resiliency. The main effects of a prior-CSR reputation on consumer
intentions do not differ by crisis type. When it comes to the impact of crisis type,
preventable crises produce weaker intent regarding supportive communication and crisis
resiliency in general, but no impact of crisis type was found with resistance to negative
information. Instead, consumers display similar resistance to negative information across
both crisis types (victim; preventable) and are only influenced by a prior reputation. In other
words, consumers are greatly influenced by a prior reputation but not always influenced by
crisis type.
Finally, the study findings revealed a determinant role of post-crisis CSR reputation on
consumers’ crisis-related behavioral intent (resistance to negative information, supportive
communication and crisis resiliency). As post-crisis CSR reputation becomes more positive,
consumers display greater resistance to negative information, supportive communication
intent and crisis resiliency. The findings provide additional empirical evidence to confirm
CSR benefits as shields against negative scrutiny (Eisingerich et al., 2011), boosters for
consumer intent to engage in supportive communication (Kim, 2017) and activities that
encourage intent to display strong resilience (Bhattacharya and Sen, 2003). The findings
imply that a crisis-influenced, possibly damaged post-crisis CSR reputation still holds
significant value and can assist in the damage repair process. The finding may provide
support for prior studies’ proposal that “reputation repairs” should be a main goal of crisis
response strategies to best mitigate crisis-inflicted damage (Coombs, 2015). Considering the
values of post-crisis CSR reputation, a corresponding emphasis regarding crisis
management needs to be placed on the means of protecting reputational assets (Coombs
and Holladay, 2002). However, business managers and communication specialists need to
remember that once a crisis occurs, damage can result even with the best crisis management
plans, especially if a company does not have an established CSR reputation.
The study has some drawbacks. The artificiality that an experimental study carries
limits the generalization of the study’s findings. This study used only four companies
(Panera, McDonald’s, Target and Walmart) to represent food and retailing industries and
used one crisis topic as an example of each crisis type. By its nature, an experiment tends to
focus more on internal validity to demonstrate clearer associations between variables, and
this study was not an exception. However, unlike many previous studies this study avoids
the use of fictitious companies for its stimuli to increase external validity. That is because a Product-harm
reputation should be built over time, which is how it carries strong value in consumers’ crisis
minds. When using a fictitious company, manipulating reputation through stimuli cannot
possibly reproduce the impact of reputation in real life. Despite the importance of using real
companies, doing so poses difficulties for controlling possible interference. To address the
issue, several techniques were used, including matching familiarity and statistical control, to
control for pre-existing attitudes. The random distribution of participants into conditions 39
also should have helped reduce systematic errors by interfering factors. With these possible
limitations, we interpreted the study’s findings with caution, and future studies should
consider assessing more factors to control. We also suggest that future studies use real
crisis cases and a survey method to validate the findings of this study. Finally, we purposely
focused on the specific dimensional effects of reputation to determine whether a CSR
reputation carries a buffering effect on consumers’ reactions to product-harm crises, because
the findings can encourage companies to consider adopting more systematic CSR programs.
While corporate reputation consists of multiple dimensions that often are interconnected, it
is very difficult to truly separate the specific dimensional effects of reputation. This study is
not free from such fundamental discussions. In this study, the impact of CSR reputation on
consumer responses during crises seems to be similar to the impact of overall reputation,
and therefore there might be a valid question as to whether it is necessary to explore specific
dimensional impacts of reputation. This is a valid point that future research needs to
consider to find answers.
Despite the study’s limitations, it provides valuable implications for scholars in crisis
management and for practitioners in the field. First, the findings support the notion of
reputational capital (Fombrun and van Riel, 2003b); when a company has accumulated
positive CSR-bred reputational capital, it can maintain positive capital after losing some of
that capital during product-harm crises. The leftover CSR capital will further buffer against
possible damage inflicted by future crises.
Second, this study demonstrates the importance of establishing CSR reputation prior to a
crisis as a way of buffering against the debilitating impacts of product-harm crises. Also, it
shows that negative prior-CSR reputation can amplify possible reputational damage caused by
product-harm crises. One rationale for managers to engage in CSR initiatives and CSR reporting
is that it serves as a form of reputation risk management (Eisenegger and Schranz, 2011;
Fombrun, Gardberg and Barnett, 2000; Fombrun, Gardberg and Sever, 2000). We add one more
important rationale: that failing to demonstrate CSR can intensify serious reputational damage
inflicted by crises. This finding also provides empirical support for the notion of the Velcro
effect (see Coombs and Holladay, 2001), in that negative prior reputation snags additional
reputational damage. “The organization seems to start from a one-down position when there is
an unfavorable relationship or crisis history” (Coombs and Holladay, 2001, p. 338).
Third, this finding provides strong support for the theoretical framework of
confirmatory bias effects at anticipating CSR reputational impact during product-harm
crises (Dean, 2004), while discovering that the expectancy violation theory does not have the
best utility unlike prior studies (Sohn and Lariscy, 2014). Consumers were more likely to
ignore or discount negative information and draw positive conclusions about a company
with favorable CSR reputation, whereas consumers augmented negative information to
draw less positive conclusions for a negatively perceived company. One possible
explanation of why the expectancy violation theory has less utility is because product-harm
crises are not technically a violation of a “CSR” reputation. A CSR reputation is not directly
related to a company’s ability to produce goods and services. Therefore, it seems that
confirmatory bias effects carry a greater utility over an expectancy violation theory for
studies focusing on a “transferring effects” of CSR reputation onto consumers’ perception of
unrelated areas (e.g. corporate ability).
CCIJ Finally, examining consumers’ communication-related intentions and crisis resiliency is
24,1 one of the strengths of this study. Negative publicity in times of product-harm crises, in
particular, has the potential to damage corporate tangible and intangible assets (Dean,
2004). Publicity is generally regarded as more credible and more influential than
company-controlled communications (Bond and Kirshenbaum, 1998). Minimizing the
damage of negative information and maximizing consumers’ supportive communication can
40 be key for faster recovery from crises, not to mention that stronger crisis resiliency helps
this process as well. Given that consumers can function as active agenda-builders through
different online platforms and become important influencers in times of crisis, knowing the
impact of consumers’ communication-related intentions are more important than ever. We
found a direct association between a prior- and post-crisis CSR reputation and consumer
intentions regarding supportive communication, resistance to negative information and
crisis resiliency. Because this is the first study to our knowledge to test the effects of CSR
reputation (not CSR engagement periodically) on consumers’ communication-related
intentions and crisis resiliency during product-harm crises, additional studies to verify the
impact of a prior-CSR reputation will be needed.

References
Alniacik, E., Alniacik, U. and Erdogmus, B. (2012), “How do the dimensions of corporate reputation
affect employment intentions?”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 3-19.
Alsop, R.J. (2004), The 18 Immutable Laws of Corporate Reputation: Creating, Protecting, and Repairing
Your Most Valuable Asset, Free Press, New York, NY.
Basil, M.D. (1996), “The use of student samples in communication research”, Journal of Broadcasting
and Electronic Media, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 431-440.
Becker-Olsen, K.L., Cudmore, A. and Hill, R.P. (2006), “The impact of perceived corporate social
responsibility on consumer behavior”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59, pp. 46-53.
Beckwith, N.E. and Lehmann, D.R. (1975), “The importance of halo effects in multi-attribute attitude
models”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 265-275.
Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2003), “Consumer-company identification: a framework for
understanding consumers’ relationships with companies”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67 No. 2,
pp. 76-88.
Bond, J. and Kirshenbaum, R. (1998), Under the Radar: Talking to Today’s Cynical Consumer,
John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Brown, T. and Dacin, P. (1997), “The company and the product: corporate associations and consumer
product responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 68-84.
Burgoon, J.K. and LePoire, B.A. (1993), “Effects of communication expectancies, actual communication,
and expectancy disconfirmation on evaluations of communicators and their communication
behavior”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 67-96.
Burson-Marsteller and Penn Schoen Berland (2013), “2013 Crisis Survey: Burson-Marsteller Penn
Schoen Berland”, available at: www.bcw-global.comwhat-we-do/our-thinking/crisis-survey-20
13/?lang=en (accessed September 1, 2016).
Carley, K.M. and Lin, Z. (1995), “Organizational designs suited to high performance under stress”,
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 221-230.
Coombs, T. (2015), Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding, 4th ed., Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Coombs, T. and Holladay, S. (2015), “CSR as crisis risk: expanding how we conceptualize the
relationship”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 144-162.
Coombs, W.T. (1995), “Choosing the right words: the development of guidelines for the selection
of the ‘appropriate’ crisis response strategies”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 8,
pp. 447-476.
Coombs, W.T. (1998), “An analytic framework for crisis situations: better responses from a better Product-harm
understanding of the situation”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 177-191. crisis
Coombs, W.T. (2007), “Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: the development and
application of situational crisis communication theory”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 163-176.
Coombs, W.T. (2012), Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding, Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
41
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (1996), “Communication and attributions in a crisis: an experimental
study in crisis communication”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 279-295.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2001), “An extended examination of the crisis situations: a fusion of
the relational management and symbolic approaches”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 321-340.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2002), “Helping crisis managers protect reputational assets: initial
tests of the situational crisis communication theory”, Management Communication Quarterly,
Vol. 16, pp. 165-186.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2006), “Unpacking the halo effect: reputation and crisis management”,
Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 123-137.
Davidson, W. and Worrell, D. (1992), “Research notes and communications: the effect of product recall
announcements on shareholder wealth”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 3 No. 6, pp. 467-473.
Dawar, N. and Pillutla, M.M. (2000), “Impact of product-harm crises on brand equity: the moderating
role of consumer expectations”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 215-226.
Dean, D.H. (2004), “Consumer reaction to negative publicity: effects of corporate reputation,
response, and responsibility for a crisis event”, Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 41
No. 2, pp. 192-211.
De Castro, G.M., Lopez, J.E.N. and Saez, P.L. (2006), “Business and social reputation: exploring the
concept and main dimensions of corporate reputation”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 63 No. 4,
pp. 361-370.
Ducassy, I. (2013), “Does corporate social responsibility pay off in times of crisis? An alternate
perspective on the relationship between financial and corporate social performance”, Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 157-167.
Eisenegger, M. and Schranz, M. (2011), “Reputation management and corporate social responsibility”,
in Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J. and Mays, S. (Eds), Handbook of Communication and Corporate Social
Responsibility, Wiley Blackwell, Oxford.
Eisingerich, A.B., Rubera, G., Seifert, M. and Bhardwaj, G. (2011), “Doing good and doing better despite
negative information?: the role of corporate social responsibility in consumer resistance to
negative information”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 60-75.
Fombrun, C. (1996), Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image, Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
Fombrun, C. and van Riel, C.B.M. (2003a), “The reputational landscape”, Corporate Reputation Review,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1-16, doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540008.
Fombrun, C.J. (1998), “Corporate reputation”, in Nicholson, N. (Ed.), Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of
Organizational Behavior, Blackwell Publishers, Malden.
Fombrun, C.J. and Foss, C.B. (2001), “The reputation quotient, part 1: developing a reputation quotient”,
The Gauge, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 1-2.
Fombrun, C.J. and Shanley, M. (1990), “What is in a name reputation building and corporate strategy”,
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 33, pp. 233-259.
Fombrun, C.J. and van Riel, C.B.M. (2003b), Fame & Fortune: How Successful Companies Build Winning
Reputations, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Barnett, M.L. (2000), “Opportunity platforms and safety nets:
corporate citizenship and reputation risk”, Business and Society Review, Vol. 105 No. 1, pp. 85-106.
CCIJ Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Sever, J.W. (2000), “The reputation quotient: a multi-stakeholder
24,1 measure of corporate reputation”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 241-255.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B. and Anderson, R. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed., Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Harris, J., Schwartz, M. and Brownell, K. (2010), Evaluating Fast Food Nutrition and Marketing to
Youth, Yale University, New Haven, CT.
42 Herbig, P. and Milewicz, J. (1993), “The relationship of reputation and credibility to brand success”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 18-24.
Hillenbrand, C. and Money, K. (2007), “Corporate responsibility and corporate reputation: two separate
concepts or two sides of the same coin?”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 261-277.
Jones, G.H., Jones, B.H. and Little, P. (2000), “Reputation as reservoir: buffering against loss in times of
economic crisis”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 3, pp. 21-29.
Kim, J., Kim, H.J. and Cameron, G.T. (2009), “Making nice may not matter: the interplay of crisis type,
response type and crisis issue on perceived organizational responsibility”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 86-88.
Kim, S. (2011), “Transferring effects of CSR strategy on consumer responses: the synergistic model of
corporate communication strategy”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 218-241.
Kim, S. (2014), “What’s worse in times of product-harm crisis? Negative corporate ability or negative
CSR reputation?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 123 No. 1, pp. 157-170.
Kim, S., Avery, E.J. and Lariscy, R.W. (2011), “Reputation repair at the expense of providing instructing
and adjusting information following crises: examining 18 years of crisis response strategy
research”, International Journal of Strategic Communication, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 183-199.
Kim, Y. (2017), “Consumer responses to the food industry’s proactive and passive environmental
CSR programs, factoring in price as CSR tradeoff”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 140 No. 2,
pp. 307-321.
Kim, Y.S. and Choi, Y. (2011), “College students’ perception of Philip Morris’s tobacco-related smoking
prevention and tobacco-unrelated social responsibility”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 184-199.
Klein, J. and Dawar, N. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility and consumers’ attributions and
brand evaluations in a product–harm crisis”, International of Research in Marketing, Vol. 21
No. 3, pp. 203-217.
Lai, C.S., Chiu, C.J., Yang, C.F. and Pai, D.C. (2010), “The effects of corporate social responsibility on
brand performance: the mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 457-469.
Lewis, S. (2001), “Measuring corporate reputation”, Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 31-35.
Lin, C.-P., Chen, S.-C., Chiu, C.-K. and Lee, W.-Y. (2011), “Understanding purchase intention during
product-harm crises: moderating effects of perceived corporate ability and corporate social
responsibility”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 102 No. 3, pp. 455-471.
Luo, X. and Bhattacharya, C.B. (2009), “The debate over doing good: corporate social performance, strategic
marketing levers, and firm-idiosyncratic risk”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73 No. 6, pp. 198-213.
MacKenzie, S.B. and Lutz, R.J. (1989), “An empirical examination of the structural antecedents of
attitude toward the ad in an advertising pretesting context”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No. 2,
pp. 48-65.
Minor, D. (2010), “Corporate social responsibility at reputation insurance: theory and Evidence”,
working paper, Hass School of Business, available at: https://businessinnovation.berkeley.
edu/wp-content/uploads/businessinnovation-archive/WilliamsonSeminar/minor091610.pdf
(accessed September 1, 2016).
Minor, D.B. and Morgan, J. (2011), “CSR as reputation insurance: primum non nocere”, California
Management Review, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 40-59.
Perrow, C. (1984), Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies, Basic Books, New York, NY. Product-harm
Reputation Institute (2017), “2017 – Global RepTrak® 100”, available at: www.reputationinstitute.com/ crisis
research/2017-global-reptrak (accessed September 1, 2016).
Rindova, V.P. and Fombrun, C.J. (1999), “Constructing competitive advantage: the role of firm-
constituent interactions”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 691-710.
Roberts, P.W. and Dowling, G.R. (2002), “Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial
performance”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 1077-1093. 43
Sabate, J.M. and Puente, E. (2003), “Empirical analysis of the relationship between corporate reputation
and financial performance: a survey of the literature”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 6 No. 2,
pp. 161-177.
Sanchez, J.L.F. and Sotorrio, L.L. (2007), “The creation of value through corporate reputation”, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 335-346.
Sohn, Y. and Lariscy, R.W. (2014), “A ‘buffer’ or ‘Boomerang?’ The role of corporate reputation in bad
times”, Communication Research, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 237-259.
Sustainability (2004), Gearing Up: From Corporate Responsibility to Good Governance and Scalable
Solutions, Sustainability, London.
Vanhamme, J. and Grobben, B. (2009), “ ‘Too good to be true!’ The effectiveness of CSR history in
countering negative publicity”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 273-283.
Waters, J. (2006), “Young, with tons of purchasing power”, MarketWatch, October 11, available at:
http://marketwatch.com (accessed September 1, 2016).
Yoon, E., Guffey, H.J. and Kijewski, V. (1993), “The effects of information and company reputation on
intentions to buy a business service”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 215-228.

Further reading
Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Sever, J.M. (1999), “The reputation quotient SM: a multi-stakeholder
measure of corporate reputation”, The Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 241-255.
Kim, S. and Sung, K. (2013), “Revisiting the effectiveness of base crisis response strategies in
comparison of reputation management crisis responses”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 62-78.
Rindova, A.B., Rubera, G., Seifert, M. and Bhardwaj, G. (2011), “Doing good and doing better despite
negative information? The role of corporate social responsibility in consumer resistance to
negative information”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 60-75.

Corresponding author
Yeonsoo Kim can be contacted at: kim28yx@jmu.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

CCIJ
24,1
44
Received 5 September 2018
Revised 3 November 2018
Accepted 3 November 2018
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 44-62
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-09-2018-0092
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
The challenges of gamifying
CSR communication
Kateryna Maltseva
BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo, Norway
Christian Fieseler
Department of Communication and Culture,
BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo, Norway, and
Hannah Trittin-Ulbrich
Leuphana Universitat Luneburg, Luneburg, Germany
Abstract
Purpose – A growing number of research report positive effects of gamification, that is the introduction of
game elements to non-game contexts, on stakeholder intentions and behaviors. Hence, gamification is
proposed as an effective tool for organizations to educate their stakeholders about corporate social
responsibility (CSR) and sustainability-related topics. The paper aims to discuss these issues.
Design/methodology/approach – In this paper, the authors ask whether gamification can communicate
matters of social and environmental concern. Based on three consecutive experimental studies, the authors
show that there are boundary conditions to the effectiveness of gamified communication on stakeholder
attitude, intention and behavior.
Findings – The authors find positive, negative and insignificant effects of gamification on pro-environmental
attitude, intention and behavior. Based on these ambiguous results, the authors conclude with a call for more
rigorous forms of designing gamified experiences to foster stakeholder learning and highlight and develop
several such future research and engagement opportunities.
Originality/value – The study is the first to apply gamification to the context of corporate and in particular
CSR communication. It is furthermore one of the first studies that actually research the effects of gamification
empirically, and in controlled experimental conditions.
Keywords Internet, CSR communication, Gamification, Serious games
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Encouraging individuals to learn about sustainability and subsequently, to change their
behavior, has traditionally been a challenging conundrum for corporate social responsibility
(CSR) and sustainability research, practice and education. Frustrated by the lack of
effectiveness of conventional forms of engaging their stakeholders with environmental and
social concerns, in recent years, business and non-profit organizations increasingly turn to
game features in their digital CSR communication to motivate their stakeholders to engage
more in pro-social or pro-environmental behavior (Coombs and Holladay, 2015). The use of
game elements (i.e. reward systems, feedback or competition) in contexts that are normally
not associated with games is referred to as “gamification” (Robson et al., 2015). Designs of
gamification vary in their content and structure, but gamification generally constitutes
persuasive interventions that convey strategic messages that aim to lead to desirable
cognitive or behavioral outcomes (Seaborn and Fels, 2015). Hence, games and gamification
are generally viewed as suitable device for educating stakeholders about business practices
(Landers, 2014; Veltsos, 2017; Vesa et al., 2017).
Initial conceptual research suggests that gamified messages on environmental or social
matters are useful devices for corporations to educate their stakeholders about CSR and
sustainability (Coombs and Holladay, 2015). In contrast to other, more traditional forms of
communication, gamification provides a subtler and less direct form of communication that
might raise stakeholder awareness in a unobtrusive manner (Coombs and Holladay, 2015).
In other words, gamification is proposed as a suitable mechanism to change stakeholder Challenges of
perceptions toward CSR and sustainability, which is a necessary precondition for changes in gamifying CSR
the stakeholders’ behaviors toward further pro-social or pro-environmental behavior. communication
Gamification might thus engage audiences in CSR matters that would, under different
circumstances, not pay attention to CSR messages in the first place, raising and creating
awareness for issues which might lead audiences to engage deeper with the message they
would otherwise not be sufficiently motivated to. 45
Beyond these initial propositions from the CSR and sustainability domain, the
gamification literature in general advocates for a positive effect of gamification on the
effectiveness of communication, and subsequently on stakeholder perceptions and behavior.
However, a substantial amount of the current studies on the effect of gamification is based
either on conceptual (Veltsos, 2017) or survey-based methodologies (Roth et al., 2015;
Seaborn and Fels, 2015; Zichermann and Linder, 2013); for a notable exception, see Hamari
(2013). Yet, we argue that current research designs do not allow for a comprehensive
analysis of the effect of gamification. Hence, in order to test the effects of gamified
messaging regarding sustainability-related issues on stakeholder intentions, attitudes and
behavior, we in the following rely on an experimental design. We find that gamification may
have a positive, negative as well as insignificant effect on pro-environmental attitude,
behavioral intention and behavior.
With these results, our paper makes the following contributions. First, we contribute to
CSR and sustainability research with the first study that empirically investigates the
effectiveness of gamification in the context of CSR communication and education. We find
that gamification raises stakeholder attention for CSR and sustainability-related topics, but
only to a limited degree changes their intentions and behaviors. Our ambiguous empirical
results indicate that gamification is only to a degree able to support organizations in their
endeavors to educate their stakeholders about CSR and sustainability. Second, we
contribute to gamification research with a rigorous experimental study on the effects of
gamification on stakeholder attention, intention and behavior. Our experimental insights
echo skeptical voices that question the effectiveness and appropriateness of gamification
(Bogost, 2011) in the organizational context, at least as far as sustainability issues are
concerned. Our study thus enables practitioners, researchers and educators interested in
gamification to develop a better understanding of the conditions under which gamification
can positively influence pro-sustainability attitudes, intentions and behavior, and to develop
the design of more effective learning and engagement measures.
We proceed as follows: first, we review research concerned with the effects of
gamification, particularly in the context of CSR and sustainability. Second, we present the
methodology of our three experiments that were conducted to test the effects of gamified
sustainability communications on pro-environmental concerns and stakeholder behavior
toward sustainability. Third and finally, we conclude and discuss the results of our studies
in the light of the existing literature and suggest future research opportunities.

Literature review
In recent years, it has become more challenging for organizations to reach their stakeholders
via communication in a meaningful way. With a plethora of new media and content
emerging, organizations struggle for stakeholder attention. Among other messages, the
intended dialogue about an organization’s ecological, social and governance activities,
commonly termed CSR, sustainability or stakeholder communication (Bhattacharya and
Sen, 2004; Crane and Glozer, 2016; Du et al., 2010), has to compete in this new communication
regime. Generally, communicating with stakeholders about CSR and sustainability and
educating them about these matters is essential for successful organizational
attempts of implementing and encouraging responsible and sustainable actions in
CCIJ and outside of the organizational sphere (Crane and Glozer, 2016). Still, communicating
24,1 CSR remains challenging, which Morsing et al. (2008) termed the catch-22 of
CSR communication – seemingly companies that engage proactively in social and
sustainability issues raise more scrutiny about their behavior than those that do not. Hence,
new approaches to CSR communication are necessary, and in order to create awareness and
engagement among their constituencies, organizations consequently look for new ways to
46 engage their stakeholder base communicatively. Morsing et al. (2008), for instance, proposed
enabling employees to act as ambassadors for an organization’s efforts, together with
building larger coalitions with stakeholders that work together on talking issues, but may
also act as supporters when needed. On the tactical and instrumental level, one of the most
promising and most novel measures of attracting stakeholder interest in the first place, and
to engage in the processes above, might be the use of gamification in stakeholder
communication (Coombs and Holladay, 2015).
Generally, gamification is defined as the use of elements characteristic to games in
non-game contexts (Deterding et al., 2011), including the integration of game elements in
messaging regarding sustainability. Game elements are different tangible and intangible
units that constitute game experience. Both artifactual (leaderboards, badges, etc.) and
social (team spirit, competitiveness) game elements contribute to a gamified experience
(Deterding et al., 2011). Robson et al. (2015) suggested that gamified experiences are built
upon three pillars of game design: mechanics that embrace goals, rules and rewards;
dynamics that reflect how players enact mechanics, and emotions that players feel toward
the gamified experience. Yet, while in the well-established research field on sustainability
and CSR, other, new digital technologies have garnered much attention (Capriotti, 2011;
Fieseler et al., 2010), gamification has been given limited attention. To our best knowledge,
Coombs and Holladay (2015) are the first scholars that conceptualize on the effects of
gamification in CSR communication. The authors suggested that the provision of
stakeholders with gamified experiences when learning about CSR or sustainability-related
issues can be utilized to attract stakeholder to sustainability messages and can generate
positive reactions – an important prerequisite for engaging stakeholder in pro-social or
pro-environmental behavior. Yet, at least as far as sustainability issues are concerned,
little can be said about how gamification effects intentions, attitudes and behavior.
Consequently, in the following, we turn toward research that directly addresses the effects
of gamified communication.
Gamification has generally garnered increasing attention from management and
organization research and practice (Vesa et al., 2017). In this context, conceptual and
empirical studies generally document positive effects of gamification. For example,
gamification is conjectured to improve work efficiency (Zichermann and Linder, 2013),
increase motivation for learning (Seaborn and Fels, 2015), grow public awareness and to
contribute to the development of trust (Gordon and Baldwin-Philippi, 2014), to improve
group reflection at initial stages of innovation development processes (Roth et al., 2015), to
increase productivity and to contribute to social bonding (Seaborn and Fels, 2015).
Gamification is also presumed to increase user motivation to engage with products and
services (Ašeriškis and Damaševičius, 2014), and to enhance employees’ productivity,
efficiency, engagement and innovation potential (Maan, 2013). Importantly, some studies
suggest that gamification makes communication on rather complex and abstract
organizational matters more engaging. Hence, gamification is also a suitable educational
device in the context of business ethics.
Such positive effects of gamification are attributed to a number of different psychological
mechanisms. Hamari et al. (2014) emphasized the property of motivational affordances of
gamification. Gamification invokes experiences similar to playing recreational games
(Huotari and Hamari, 2012). Groh (2012) concluded that gamification rests on three main
principles adopted from self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985): relatedness, Challenges of
competence and autonomy. The experience of engaging with games is assumed to satisfy gamifying CSR
these three needs that together constitute intrinsic motivation. Games provide the context communication
for meaningful choices and interactions – well-designed games provide a sense of
competence and mastery (Rigby and Ryan, 2011). To wit, the engaging properties of
gamification are rooted in an intrinsically driven pursuit of fun and meaning.
The better part of studies in the gamification literature, including the aforementioned, 47
are either conceptual, case-based or survey-based and, to a great extent, depend on
self-determination theory to explain the effects of gamification through the facilitation of
intrinsic motivation. However, conceptual and survey-based research designs inherently do
not allow for the comprehensive analysis of whether gamified messages, campaigns or
experiences are more persuasive than non-gamified analogies. For this reason, rising
interest in gamification has led to the increased adoption of experimental designs.
A recent study on the effects of gamification on self-brand connections suggests, for
instance, that gamification exerts a positive effect on the self-brand connection through the
interactivity of interactions and through emotional or cognitive engagement (Berger et al.,
2017). Another experimental study by Müller-Stewens et al. (2017) manipulates gamification
through exposing control groups to static (visual or textual) stimuli, compared to the
experimental groups that were engaged with fully fledged games. Their findings suggest that
gamified information has a positive effect on consumer adoption of innovations through two
parallel processes: gamification increases individuals’ playfulness and stimulates curiosity
about the innovation. Simultaneously, gamification increases the vividness of information
which, in turn, increases the perceived advantage of the innovation.
Both articles made a significant and necessary contribution to gamification literature.
Their experiments suggest positive, statistically significant effects of gamification.
However, it may be argued that through introducing gamification in two papers mentioned
above, the authors did not manipulate gamification, but different variables. Müller-Stewens
et al. (2017) manipulated the product experience through exposing the experiment group in
four studies to a game while exposing the control group participants to only textual
information. Such forms of manipulation pose certain challenges in assessing the effect of
gamification. Even though the authors claim that the participants were exposed to similar
information about the product, the experience of the exposure to a textual stimulus and the
experience of playing a game are incomparable.
In their study, Berger et al. (2017) manipulated gamification though engaging an
experiment group with a game in comparison to exposing a control group to a video of
someone else playing the game. We would argue that such a manipulation of gamification is
more accurate, as it renders the experiences of the participants more comparable. However,
since both groups are exposed to a game, one may suggest that the participants from the
control condition were also exposed to a gamified stimulus. The accurate manipulation of
gamification is paramount to investigate the effect of gamification on any outcome variable.
Consequently, we suggest that the manipulation of gamification should imply minimal
differences in the amount, quality and quantity of information available to the participants
of the control group and the experiment group. In this paper, we therefore develop three
experiments that are designed with the aforementioned considerations in mind: we
manipulate gamification through creating two types of stimuli that are very similar in
the content and differ only in framing. We expose the participants to similar text and
graphics, while manipulating the presence of gamified elements.

Methodology
This paper draws on three experiments that were conducted in the context of
sustainability communications, in particular to raise pro-environmental concerns
CCIJ (measured as attitude and behavioral intention) and behaviors. The interest in the
24,1 gamification of communication practice related to sustainability is recent, yet, striking.
For example, charity organizations partnered with (social) game developers to develop
donation schemes in games, such as FarmVille 2 and ChefVille. In these games, players
could purchase virtual goods and the developer donated its share of the purchase to the
respective charity organizations. Further, players learnt about social issues and their
48 relevance and thus are incentivized to change their “real-world” behavior and to increase
their donations. Similarly, corporations use gamification elements in the form of reward
systems and competitions as mechanisms to foster positive employee motivation for
sustainability-conscious behavior in the workplace. Yet, despite the increasing popularity
of gamification in communication practice, it has received little attention in social
responsibility and management research. Likewise, there is little research available that
rigorously compares the effectiveness of traditional forms of messaging to gamified
experiences, both in general terms and with focus on pro-environmental and social issues.
Hence, more evidence is needed before settling on the true potential of gamification to
solving lacking engagement with environmental or social matters. We therefore have
chosen the context of environmental campaigns to test the effectiveness of gamified
CSR communication.

Operationalization
Due to the fact that different game elements trigger different psychological responses and
levels of playfulness, for instance, curiosity, frustration, need for achievement or joy, there is
no universal way to operationalizing gamification. However, scholars suggest that there are
certain general principles of gamification design within different fields. Stott and
Neustaedter (2013) suggested that in the context of education, freedom to fail, rapid
feedback, progression, storytelling and narrative are essential game characteristics to
gamification. Mavletova (2015) synthesized findings from previous research on the
gamification of surveys and presented a list of main elements of a gamified survey in her
research on the effect of gamification in web surveys. There are four elements essential to
gamify a survey: clear rules and goals for respondents; relevant and entertaining
narrative to involve participants, interesting and achievable tasks in order to maintain
motivation; and feedback on progress and rewards for the completion of the tasks.
Gamification design principles constitute certain levels of fun, interactivity, challenge,
playfulness and gamefulness.

Manipulation check
In the first experiment that this paper presents, we adopted Berger et al.’s (2017) logic and
measured the perceived level of gamification through asking participants how interactive
the experience was, and whether there was an element of challenge. In addition, we asked
participants whether the experience in itself was fun. The dimension of fun was introduced
as an aggregated measure for the manipulation check of gamification, due to the extensive
amount of gamification literature building up on self-determination theory. In other words,
the dimension of fun was introduced to discover whether the gamified experience was
enjoyable in itself.
Interactivity was provided by allowing participants to interact with a stimulus, navigate
through it and see the consequences of their actions. The challenge was created by
designing certain tasks and providing feedback.
After the first experiment, we revised our operationalization of gamification, due to
moderate reliability of the aggregated construct of gamification (further elaborations are
presented in the description of the Studies 2 and 3). In the second and third experiments,
we tested the gamification manipulation through asking respondents to what extent the
experience was interactive, playful and game-like. The gamified stimulus was created to Challenges of
allow interaction, similar to the Study 1. Playfulness allowed certain improvisation of gamifying CSR
interaction and the game-likeness of the stimulus implied that the experience of interaction communication
reminded participants of playing a fully fledged game.

Theory of pro-environmental behavior

Pro-environmental behavior is defined as “a behavior that consciously seeks to minimize the 49
negative impact of one’s actions on the natural and built world” (Kollmuss and Agyeman,
2002, p. 240). Pro-environmental behavior is one of example of pro-social behavior (De Groot
and Steg, 2009); therefore, theories of pro-social behavior may serve as a foundation for
studying pro-environmental behavior. Specifically, norm-activation theory, developed by
Schwartz (1970, 1973, 1977), is commonly used by environmental psychologists to explain
how to engage people in pro-environmental behavior (Froehlich, 2014).
Norm-activation theory was initially proposed by Schwartz (1970) in order to explain
helping behavior or in other words – pro-social behavior. According to Schwartz (1970),
there are two preconditions for pro-social behavior: first, individuals must be aware of the
consequences of their actions for the welfare of others; and second, individuals must
feel some capability to control actions and their consequences. The first precondition
for pro-social behavior is referred to as “awareness of consequences” and the second
precondition is called “ascription of responsibility.”
The activation of pro-social norms is a complex process that requires interest, focus and
a certain degree of concern for a situation or a problem. Intuitively, one may become more
aware of one’s actions and feel responsible for one’s behavior in the situation that
has an individual’s attention and focus. Because gamified experiences are characterized
as engaging, absorbing and intrinsically enjoyable, we argue that gamification can
be an appropriate tool to activate a norm of pro-social, and in the case of the current
research – pro-environmental behavior.

Pro-environmental behavior measure

Turaga et al. (2010) described two types of pro-environmental behaviors: household behaviors
and environmental protection behaviors. Energy conservation and recycling are examples for
the former, while petition signing and volunteering, donations are examples for the latter. We
have chosen examples of environmental protection behaviors to model dependent variables. In
the experiments described below, we measure three sets of dependent variables associated
with pro-environmental orientation and behavior: environmental attitude, pro-environmental
behavioral intention and pro-environmental behavior. By environmental attitude we refer to
concern for a certain environmental issue. Pro-environmental behavior intention denotes
an intention to act in a way that maximizes individual’s efforts to reduce the negative
impact of human activity on the environment through, for instance, learning more about
pro-environmental initiatives, participating in pro-environmental events, etc. Finally,
pro-environmental behavior denotes behavior aimed at protecting the environment.

Study 1 – combating deforestation

Study design
Study 1 was designed to test the effect of a gamified survey on pro-environmental attitude
intention and behavior. An online experiment with between-subject design was used for data
collection. Prior to participation, respondents were randomly assigned to two groups – the
experimental group, exposed to a gamified treatment, and the control group, which was not
exposed to the gamified treatment.
CCIJ The experiment consisted of several stages. During the first stage, participants from
24,1 both groups were asked to read a text about an environmental problem of deforestation.
During the second stage, all participants proceeded to the survey questions. Participants
from the control group received a survey that was designed by means of one of the default
templates in Qualtrics (non-gamified survey), whereas participants from the experiment
group received a gamified version of the survey that contained various pre-programmed
50 tasks placed on an external website (see Figure 1). During the third, final stage of the
experiment, participants were asked to answer questions related to environmental attitude,
behavioral intention and behavior.
The design of the gamified survey for this study was developed by implementing several
game elements suggested by Mavletova (2015). First, our research group set a goal for
participants – to earn money for an environmental organization to fight deforestation. Clear rules
to achieve the goal were provided by stating that in order to earn money for the organization,
participants were supposed to answer a set of questions about deforestation correctly.
Stage 1

Participants were asked to read a text about an environmental issue of deforestation

Non-gamified condition: Gamified condition:

static survey interactive survey
Stage 2

An interactive survey was designed by implementing three game elements: flashcards,

A survey was designed
fill-in-the-blanks and a memory challenge. These game elements provided
using a default template
at Qualtrics software respondents with instructions how to complete each task, and enabled respondents to
interact with content and receive feedback
Stage 3

Dependent variables: participants were asked questions about pro-environmental attitude, behavioral intention and
Figure 1. behavior
Stimulus design for
the Study 1 Note: The figure presents a sample of question from a non-gamified survey (left image) and from
a gamified survey (right image)
Second, we developed three interactive tasks in the form of flashcards, “drag and drop” quizzes Challenges of
and “fill-in” questionnaires in order to motivate participants to achieve the goal. Third, all three gamifying CSR
interactive tasks had a feedback element; therefore, all participants could keep track of their communication
performance. As a reward for the performance, we promised to make a financial contribution to
the organization on behalf of every participant.

Sample 51
The online experiment was administrated through Amazon Mechanical Turk in October
2015. In total, 352 participants were recruited. Participants, who did not complete the survey
or failed the attention check questions, were excluded from the analysis. The final sample
consisted of 311 participants: 41.5 percent female and 58.5 percent male. Most participants
(62.1 percent) were between 18 and 34 years old. In all, 69.1 percent had either a college
degree or some college education.

Measures
We measured environmental attitude through aggregating three items related to perceived
importance, concern and impact of deforestation and necessity of immediate actions to
combat deforestation (α ¼ 0.852). Behavioral intention in the context of pro-environmental
behavior was measured through the level of agreement with five items measuring whether
participants would like to receive additional information about deforestation and
organizations that work to combat this issue. Pro-environmental behavior was measured
through asking participants to make a donation to combat deforestation.

Results
A measure of perceived gamification (varying from 1 to 5), composed of dimensions of fun,
challenge and interactivity, was constructed for manipulation check purposes (α ¼ 0.669).
The analysis of variance revealed that the manipulation was successful (Mcontrol ¼ 3.97,
SD ¼ 0.700 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 4.25, SD ¼ 0.53; F (1, 310) ¼ 15.84, p o0.000). The participants
within the experiment group who received the gamified survey indeed perceived the survey
as more interactive, fun and containing an element of challenge.
Analysis of variance was further employed to determine the effect of gamification on
environmental attitude. The effect of gamification on environmental attitude proved to be
positive (Mcontrol ¼ 4.21, SD ¼ 0.76 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 4.37, SD ¼ 0.58; F (1, 310) ¼ 4.37,
p o0.05).
In order to investigate the effect of gamification on the behavioral intention to learn
more about deforestation, fractional probit regression model was tested. This particular
technique was chosen, because the categorical data from five items were aggregated into
one variable, varying from 0 to 1[1]. The results from the regression analysis turned out to
be surprising: gamification had a negative, significant effect on the willingness to learn more
about the environmental challenge of deforestation (β ¼ −0.331, po 0.01).
The results from a χ2 test suggested that the effect of gamification on the willingness to
donate money to a NGO to combat deforestation was negative (Pearson’s χ2 ¼ 6.15,
p o0.05).
These results are ambivalent: they contradict the existing gamification literature and
suggest that the intention to motivate individuals to engage in pro-environmental
behavior through gamification may backfire. One possible explanation for the negative
effect of gamification may lie in the inappropriateness of introducing the element of fun into
the communication of serious issues. We will elaborate this argument further in the
Discussion section.
CCIJ In order to further investigate the effectiveness of gamification, we conducted
24,1 two more online experiments, but with a different stimulus. We designed and programmed
gamified advertisements to test the effect of gamification with a stimulus that resembles
communications better.

Study 2 – preserving bird habitats

52 Study design
In Study 2, we tested the effect of gamification on pro-environmental attitude, behavioral
intention and behavior by means of a different stimulus – advertising, in the context of a
different environmental problem – extinction of exotic birds. Similar to Study 1, an online
experiment with three stages was designed. Participants were randomly assigned to two
conditions of the experiment – an experimental condition with a gamified advertisement and
a control condition with static advertisement. In order to prevent respondents from guessing
the true purpose of the study, a cover story with filler tasks was created. In the beginning of
the experiment, all participants received some information about the procedure: both groups
were informed that researchers were interested in people’s opinions about various design
and branding concepts related to a group of coffee shops. Additionally, participants were
informed that they might be asked questions about their views, beliefs and opinions about
food, music, environmentalism, etc.
During the first stage of the experiment, participants completed some filler tasks by
evaluating different interior elements of a coffee shop. After evaluating furniture designs,
menus and uniforms, participants proceeded to the second stage that had a manipulation.
Participants from the control condition were exposed to a conventional advertisement in
form of a static image. In contrast, participants from the experimental condition were
exposed to a gamified advertisement.
The ad of a fictional coffee brand “Arabica Shade” was addressing the topic of
deforestation and its destructive effect on the wildlife habitat, specifically, the population of
birds. In the control condition (with the non-gamified ad), participants were simply asked to
look at the ad and answer some questions about it later. They were then presented with an
image of a coffee cup displaying birds and coffee plants on it. The message on the ad stated
that by switching to the new coffee brand “Arabica Shade,” they could save eight bird species.
In the experimental condition, participants were asked to look at the ad, but in addition, they
had to participate in a challenge to construct the advertising message that was similar in
context to the message from the control condition group (see Figure 2). Gamification was
manipulated through creating an interactive advertisement that required participants to
engage with it. The ad displayed the same coffee cup; however, there were no birds on the cup.
Instead, the cup was covered with images of coffee beans. Participants were instructed to click
on the coffee beans and find the number of bird species that could be saved by switching to
the new coffee brand. After counting the birds, participants were asked to write the number
down on the ad. If the number was correct, participants would be displayed a message
“Correct” and taken further to the survey. If the number was wrong, participants would
receive a message “The number seems to be incorrect, please, count the birds again.”
To summarize, both ads (in the experimental and control conditions) provided
participants with similar information about the value proposition of the coffee brand. The
manipulation concerned only the framing of the message: participants from the control
condition looked at the static, conventional advertisement displaying the message, while
participants from the gamified condition interacted with the ad and contributed to
constructing the message by participating in a challenge.
During the final stage of the experiment, participants from both groups were asked
questions about pro-environmental attitude, behavioral intention and behavior.
 Challenges of
gamifying CSR
communication

53
Stage 1

Filler tasks: participants were asked to evaluate different interior design elements of a coffee shop

Non-gamified Gamified condition: An interactive ad was created to demonstrate to respondents how

condition: static ad interactive ad one can behave more pro-environmentally by choosing an
environmentally friendly coffee. The following game elements were
used:
1. A task with instructions was presented to respondents
A conventional ad was 1 2. An interactive area was created on the surface of a coffee cup.
Participants were expected to click on coffee beans to uncover
created to demonstrate to
birds and count them
Stage 2

respondents how one can 2

behave more 3. A white, empty answer-field allowed participants to enter a
pro-environmentally by numeric value corresponding to the amount of birds they have
choosing an counted
environmentally friendly
coffee 4. A feedback system was implemented to display whether
participants were right or wrong in counting birds. If an answer
3 was correct, participants would receive a message “Correct.”
8 However, if the answer was incorrect, the following message
was displayed to a participant: “The number seems to be
incorrect, please, count the birds again”
Stage 3

Dependent variables: participants were asked questions about pro-environmental attitude, behavioral intention and
behavior
Figure 2.
Stimulus design for
Note: The figure presents a non-gamified advertisement (left image) and a gamified advertisement the Study 2
(right image)

Sample
The online experiment was administrated through Amazon Mechanical Turk in June 2017.
In total, 163 participants were recruited. Participants, who did not complete the survey, failed
the attention check or could not open interactive ads, were excluded from the analysis. The total
amount of the participants after cleaning the data was 145. The sample was slightly dominated
by male participants – 60 percent male, 38.6 percent female and 1.4 percent identified
themselves as “Other gender.” The majority of the participants (65.5 percent) were between
19 and 34 years old. In all, 76.6 percent had either a college degree or some college education.

Measures
We measured environmental attitude by adopting a six-point scale of involvement from
Mittal (1995) (α ¼ 0.966). Participants were asked whether they perceived the issue of
CCIJ diminishing habitats for wildlife as important, of concern, of matter, etc. Pro-environmental
24,1 behavioral intention was measured by asking participants whether they would like to join a
pro-environmental event in their community as a volunteer. Pro-environmental behavior
was measured by asking participants how much money they would like to pay for a cup of
environmentally friendly coffee. During the analysis of the effect of gamification on the
dependent variables, we controlled for personal preference for coffee, frequency of coffee
54 drinking and previous engagement with pro-environmental initiatives.

Results
A measure of perceived gamification (varying from 1 to 7), comprised of dimensions of
interactivity, playfulness and game-likeness, was constructed for manipulation check
purposes (α ¼ 0.877). The analysis of variance confirmed that the manipulation was
successful (Mcontrol ¼ 3.27, SD ¼ 1.53 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 5.78, SD ¼ 0.98; F (1, 144) ¼ 131.92,
p o0.000 (F ¼ 131.92, sig. ¼ 0.00)). Participants, who were exposed to the gamified
advertisement perceived the ad as being more interactive, playful and game-like in
comparison to participants from the control group, exposed to a static advertisement.
Gamification had no effect on environmental attitude (F (1, 144) ¼ 1.43, p ¼ 0.234),
pro-environmental behavioral intention (F (1, 144) ¼ 0.006, p ¼ 0.799) nor on
pro-environmental behavior (F (1, 144) ¼ 0.57, p ¼ 0.451). However, importantly, the
pattern of the results was similar to Study 1: participants from the gamified advertisement
condition expressed more concern about the issue of species extinction in comparison to
participants from the control condition (Mcontrol ¼ 5.72, SD ¼ 1.4 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 5.9,
SD ¼ 1.17). Similar to Study 1, the effect of gamification on behavioral intention and
behavior was negative. Participants from the gamified condition expressed less interest in
joining an environmental event (Mcontrol ¼ 3.86, SD ¼ 1.88 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 3.76, SD ¼ 1.93),
and were less willing to pay a price premium for a cup of environmentally friendly coffee
(Mcontrol ¼ 121.01, SD ¼ 96.8 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 107.87, SD ¼ 89.6).
A possible explanation for these insignificant results may be the size of the sample. It is
possible that the power of the effect was insufficient due to the fact that there were only
78 participants in the control condition and 67 participants in the experiment condition.
Another possible reason for the lack of statistical significance is the qualitative aspect of
gamification. The gamified advertisement did not include any complex game elements, such
as, for instance, time pressure. The interaction time with an advertisement was also quite
short. In order to account for those shortcomings, the third experiment was designed.

Study 3 – reducing the ecological footprint of food

Study design
Study 3 was designed with the purpose of having a more sophisticated gamification
manipulation and to measure the effect of a gamified advertisement on pro-environmental
attitude, intention and behavior. The logic of the structural setup in Study 3 was similar to
the previous two studies. Study 3 was also designed as an online experiment (to recreate the
setting in which gamified ad is delivered in real life: online). Participants were randomly
assigned to either a control group that was exposed to a static advertisement, or to an
experiment group that was exposed to a gamified advertisement.
The experiment consisted of two stages: during the first stage, participants were asked
to review different ads. In the control condition, participants were exposed to a visual
stimulus in form of a static advertisement. Participants were asked to follow a link that took
them to an external website, where they could see one ad on the web page. Participants were
informed that the website had multiple ads and could either keep reviewing the ads by
clicking a “Next Ad” button or go back to the survey, by clicking a “Back to Survey” button.
The participants were informed that they were free to review as many ads as they wanted.
Each ad presented two different meals: a photo of an environmentally friendly meal Challenges of
framed in green color, and a photo of a meal harmful to the environment framed in a gamifying CSR
red color. In addition, a textual explanation why certain meals are eco-friendlier than others communication
were provided.
In the experiment condition, participants were exposed to a visual stimulus in the form
of a gamified advertisement. They were also asked to follow a link that took them likewise
to an external website. They were provided with the following instructions on the external 55
web page: to look at the ad, to choose a meal that was better for the environment,
according to their personal judgment. After they made their choice, they received a
color-coded feedback. Similar to control condition, a photo of an environmentally friendly
meal was framed in green color, whereas a photo of a meal harmful to the environment
was framed in red color. Text, clarifying the environmental footprint of each meal, was
provided after participants made a choice and was identical to the text in the control
condition. Participants were also informed that they could review as many ads as they
wanted and they could either keep check the ads or skip the task and go back to the
survey (see Figure 3).
As soon as participants from both groups finished reviewing the ads, they proceeded to
the second stage of the experiment to answer questions on pro-environmental attitude,
behavioral intention and behavior.

Participants were asked to review different advertisements

Non-gamified Gamified condition:

An interactive ad was created to demonstrate
condition: static ad interactive ad to respondents how one can behave more
pro-environmentally by choosing an
environmentally friendly meal. The following
game elements were used:
Stage 1

1. A task with instructions was presented to

A conventional ad was respondents
created to demonstrate 2. A timer was set on 15 s to restrict time
2
to respondents how allocated to make a choice of a meal
one can behave more
pro-environmentally by 3 3. A feedback system was implemented to
choosing an display whether participants guessed
environmentally friendly correctly and how many points they have
dish earned
If a participant chose an environmentally
friendly dish a feedback line “Good job!”
colored in green would appear. If a
participant guessed wrongly, a red
feedback line “Bad job!” would appear
Stage 2

Dependent variables: participants were asked questions about pro-environmental attitude, behavioral intention and
behavior
Figure 3.
Stimulus design for
Note: The figure presents a non-gamified advertisement (left image) and a gamified advertisement the Study 3
(right image)
CCIJ Sample
24,1 Participants were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk in November 2017. Responses
from 149 participants were registered. Participants who failed to complete the survey or
failed the attention check we excluded from the sample. Due to a technical error of the
software, responses of two participants turned out to be blank. In addition, participants who
reported dietary allergies and/or intolerance were also excluded from the analysis. The final
56 sample for analysis consisted of 126 participants. The sample was slightly dominated by
male participants – 55.6 percent male, 43.7 percent female and 0.8 percent identified as
“Other gender.” The majority of participants (61.9 percent) were between 20 and 34 years
old. In total, 85.7 percent had either a college degree or some college education.

Measures
We measured environmental attitude by adopting an eight-item measure of attitude toward
the pollution problems from the Ecology Scale by Maloney et al. (1975). Participants were
asked whether they believe that the issue of the environmental footprint is overrated,
whether they feel frightened or indifferent about the consequences of pollution, etc.
(α ¼ 0.922). To measure behavioral orientation, a variable “future orientation” was
constructed from five items (α ¼ 0.928). “Future orientation” measured intentions to buy
environmentally friendly food, to eat organic food in the restaurants, to pay attention to eco-
friendly food selection in the supermarket, etc. Pro-environmental behavior was measured
as willingness to donate money to a certain NGO. Participants were informed that they
would receive a 50 cent bonus for completing the survey. They were later asked how much
out of those 50 cents they would be willing to donate to a NGO that supports local food
producers with sustainable farming techniques. During the analysis of the effect of
gamification on dependent variables, we controlled for previous engagement with
pro-environmental initiatives.

Results
A measure of perceived gamification (varying from 1 to 7), comprised of dimensions of
interactivity, playfulness and game-likeness (similar to Study 2) was constructed for
manipulation check purposes (α ¼ 0.746). The manipulation was successful (Mcontrol ¼ 2.99,
SD ¼ 1.45 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 4.29, SD ¼ 1.54; F (1, 125) ¼ 23.51, p o0.000).
Gamification had no effect on environmental attitude (F (1, 125) ¼ 0.004, p ¼ 0.95),
pro-environmental behavior intention (F (1, 125) ¼ 1.65, p ¼ 0.202) and pro-environmental
behavior (Pearson’s χ2 ¼ 0.67, p ¼ 0.413). Participants from the control condition expressed
slightly more concern for the problem of pollution caused by food production,
transportation and recycling in comparison to the participants exposed to the gamified
treatment (Mcontrol ¼ 4.47, SD ¼ 1.43 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 4.36, SD ¼ 1.41 (Mcon ¼ 4.47,
SD ¼ 1.43)). The value “future orientation” was also higher in the control group than in
the experiment group (Mcontrol ¼ 4.72, SD ¼ 1.41 vs Mgamificiation ¼ 4.29, SD ¼ 1.58).
Similarly, participants exposed to the gamified ads were less willing to donate money to
the charity in comparison to participants from the control condition.
Similar to Study 2, the effect size and its insignificance could be explained by low number
of participants. However, if gamified communications are indeed not more effective than
conventional communication tools, both scholar and practitioners should reconsider their
optimism regarding gamified communications.

Discussion
This paper aimed at testing the effectiveness of gamification as communicative device to
educate stakeholders about CSR and sustainability-related topics. In this pursuit, it is the
first empirical project that establishes the link between gamification and CSR or stakeholder Challenges of
communication. We conducted three experiments for this purpose. Our results suggest that gamifying CSR
gamified advertisements can have positive, negative or insignificant effects on individual communication
pro-environmental attitude, intention and behavior. Importantly, the overall valence,
ambivalence and inconsistency of our results suggests the importance of further theoretical
and empirical investigation when and under which conditions gamification is an effective
means to engage stakeholder in sustainability-related concerns. In the following, we discuss 57
the results of our three experiments in the light of the existing research.

Positive effects
In line with existing research, we initially hypothesized a positive effect of gamification on
pro-environmental attitude, intention and behavior, which turned out to be the case only for
the measure of attitude in the first experiment. The positive effect of gamification may be
explained by the curiosity it sparks toward a communicated issue (Müller-Stewens et al.,
2017). Sustainability issues traditionally tend to be, for the most part, communicated in a
rather utilitarian format. However, looking at related research such as in consumer
behavior, it might be adequate to assume that the interest in ecological, social and
governance issues could also by driven, at least among certain stakeholder segments, by
additional, more hedonic factors. Gamification might hence serve as a conduit for such
motivations. Furthermore, the competitive facets of gamification might bring an otherwise
underutilized social dimension to sustainability communication, which corresponds with for
instance research by Caruana and Chatzidakis (2014) who painted conscious consumption
as a conduit of social bonding, similar to other research in eco-communities that implicitly
employ sustainable consumption practices to cement relationships (Alba and Williams,
2013; Etzioni, 1999; Kozinets, 2002).
Next to the social aspect, Schaefer and Crane (2005) identified the element of exploration
as a motivation to buy organic products. Some sustainable forms of consumption, as well as
getting involved in the overall lifestyle of being interested and contributing to sustainability
may fulfill certain hedonic motives such as aesthetic, experiential and enjoyment-related
benefits (Batra and Ahtola, 1991; Chitturi et al., 2007; Dhar and Wertenbroch, 2000;
Strahilevitz and Myers, 1998). Associated with hedonic experiential behaviors is the desire
to be entertained, have fun and to be immersed in the experience (Wolfinbarger and Gilly,
2001), which may be further conduit why gamified experiences might exert positive effects
on attitudes, intentions and behaviors.

Negative effects
Our study further reveals negative effects: the gamification of the survey had a negative
effect on participants’ willingness to learn more about an environmental issue of
deforestation. Participants from the gamified survey condition were also less likely to
donate money to a NGO. The negative effect of gamification could be an indicator for a
“depleting” nature of play. Interacting with playful environments requires certain cognitive
resources to navigate the environment of play. Respondents may believe that by engaging
with information and stimuli about pro-environmental initiatives, they might have already
exhausted their interest with the topic. A number of studies from psychology suggest that
when individuals exercise too much self-control (e.g. when making choices, controlling an
environment or initiating an action), their energy, available to self, decreases (Ryan and
Deci, 2008). Individuals get into the state of depletion that resembles cognitive tiredness.
Under such conditions, people may engage in hedonic rather than rational behaviors
(Baumeister et al., 2008), or as in the case of gamification, they may develop feelings of
indifference toward the subject of pro-environmental campaigns.
CCIJ Alternatively, gamification itself as a tool may not be appropriate to construct messages
24,1 of serious content. Gamification has to be congruent with the task and context to be
successfully implemented (Liu et al., 2016). Environmental problems are those serious
issues that many companies, governments and civic society members try to resolve.
Environmental challenges have proved to be detrimental to people’s comfort, well-being and
safety. Therefore, incorporating the elements of playfulness and interactivity into
58 communication about environmental challenges may trivialize the significance of these
challenges and, as a result, undermine the effectiveness of communication.

Insignificant effects
The partial insignificance of our results may be explained by the nature of the experimental
method and stimulus design. We intended to create experiment conditions, close to
laboratory conditions and therefore created three experiments with gamified stimuli that
were core to the experimental procedure. Our focus on gamification stimuli, rather than on a
background story, may to a degree explain the ineffectiveness of gamification. In fact, the
observed ineffectiveness of gamification might also be explained by the fact that one of the
most challenging aspects of implementing gamification is to design a gamified experience in
a way that would support the main activity (Knaving and Björk, 2013). The three
experiments presented in this paper relied on gamified messages that might have been
considered outside of real, believable contexts, which, in turn, might have diminished the
effect of the manipulation.
Finally, as we previously suggested, the insignificance of the results might be explained
by a low number of participants within each experimental and control conditions. Indeed,
some of the experimental studies that have been discussed in the literature review of our
paper used between 80 and 900 observations per condition. We have followed a common
recommendation of selecting at least 30 participants per condition (VanVoorhis and
Morgan, 2007) in sample. However, our number of participants may not have been sufficient
to ensure the significance of gamification effect.

Conclusion
Despite the ambivalence of the results, we argue that the present research adds new insights
to literature both on CSR communications and on gamification research.
In the domain of CSR communications, to our knowledge, this paper is one of the first
empirical studies to add to the debate of implementing gamification in sustainability
messaging. Second, the results obtained from the three experiments question initial, optimistic
views on the relevance of gamification for CSR or stakeholder communication (Coombs and
Holladay, 2015). Gamification could likewise be a form of slacktivism, a phenomenon that
describes engagement with issues such as sustainability via online media, without making
any tangible impact on solving those issues in real life (de Bakker, 2015; Morozov, 2009).
We further add to the gamification literature by developing a robust manipulation of
gamification and empirically testing it in three different experiments. We show that the
robustness of manipulation may explain that gamification in itself may have a small or
insignificant effect on attitudes, intentions and behaviors. Aligned, on a practical note, we
propose that the proper contextualization of gamification may be a key requirement for
gamification to be effective. We deem it highly important that the game, its narrative and
mechanics are closely connected to the activity the user was intending to perform in the first
place. In other words, it is likely that controlled experimental settings might underreport
gamification’s effectiveness for cases where participants were not actively looking for
sustainability information in the first place. A fairer comparison would be between users
that are already actively engaged in a very focused, sustainability-related activity such as,
for instance, online shopping for organic food.
 In such scenarios, however, the gamified experience should not only align closely with Challenges of
the ends the user wants to achieve, but we furthermore propose that the gamified elements gamifying CSR
should be as unobtrusive as possible. Currently, gamified experiences are still novel, hence communication
there could be an over-reporting of their effectiveness as long as consumers are still curious
about such a novelty. With more exposure, we deem it likely that the novelty of gamification
wears off (see also Koivisto and Hamari (2014)). At least the more attention demanding
gamification implementations then could lose their effectiveness, particularly, when they 59
impact convenience of interacting with a message, product or service. Hence, the
implementation should require as little extra effort as possible.
Our findings illustrate that gamification may not be a suitable tool to educate individuals
about sustainability challenges. The results of the first experiment (with a gamified vs non-
gamified survey) showed that the gamification of information presentation sparked less
interest in individuals than conventional framing. In particular, our respondents showed
less interest in learning more about the environmental issue of deforestation. They also
expressed more reluctance to donate to a NGO. Such increased indifference to an
environmental issue among people exposed to gamification is an indication that the
potential of gamification to increase retention of communication is questionable.
Gamification of information may shift individual’s focus from the topic to an experiential
component of play and exhaust individual’s interest in the topic. Alternatively, the element
of fun associated with gamification may seem incongruent to the topic of sustainability.
Different groups of stakeholders may find it inappropriate to implement playful and
interactive design for communication about issues of sustainability. Such incongruence may
affect information retention and result in “mixed feelings” about the topic. These
considerations imply that intention to educate people about sustainability issues by
implementing gamification in communications may be a fruitless attempt.
Finally, at least in our experimental conceptualizations, there is some inherent
contradiction between the more ego-driven hedonic principle and asking users to consider
the greater-good – that is winning, in order to give the spoils of the game away. It is
challenging to design the reward system just right, so that it works to the player’s benefit
while not making him unobservant of the bigger picture.
The results thus suggest that more empirical research is needed in the context of
gamification in general, and gamified sustainability communications in particular. Future
research could profit from robust gamification manipulations while developing more
complex experimental designs. More research is also needed to address the issues of
appropriateness of using gamification in communicating the issues of sustainability and
eco-friendliness. One important and unexplored qualification has to be added to our results,
which might explain the ambivalent results of gamifying CSR communication. We did not
distinguish between those that have an inherent exposure and liking for gaming and the
states that come with this, such as, for instance, a higher preference for competiveness, or a
higher acceptance for audiovisual cues. It could very well be that people that dislike the
states inherent in gamified approaches might be turned off from the underlying message.
It would be interesting for future research to untangle these possible underlying
explanatory variables more, and to explore the then possibly emerging practical challenge:
if gamified CSR communication might be suitable for some audiences but not for others,
how to address the right audience via the right instrument.

Note
1. The data for behavioral intention were in parallel analyzed by means of linear regression. The
measure of interest was treated as a continuous variable, varying from 1 to 5, and the results
obtained by the method of linear regression were convergent with the result from the fractional
probit regression model.
CCIJ References
24,1 Alba, J.W. and Williams, E.F. (2013), “Pleasure principles: a review of research on hedonic
consumption”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 2-18.
Ašeriškis, D. and Damaševičius, R. (2014), “Gamification patterns for gamification applications”,
Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 39, pp. 83-90.
Batra, R. and Ahtola, O.T. (1991), “Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian sources of consumer
60 attitudes”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 159-170.
Baumeister, R.F., Sparks, E.A., Stillman, T.F. and Vohs, K.D. (2008), “Free will in consumer behavior:
self-control, ego depletion, and choice”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 4-13.
Berger, A., Schlager, T., Sprott, D.E. and Herrmann, A. (2017), “Gamified interactions: whether, when,
and how games facilitate self–brand connections”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 652-673.
Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2004), “Doing better at doing good: when, why, and how consumers
respond to corporate social initiatives”, California Management Review, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 9-24.
Bogost, I. (2011), “Gamification is bullshit”, in Walz, S.P. and Deterding, S. (Eds), The Gameful World:
Approaches, Issues, Applications, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 65-80.
Capriotti, P. (2011), “Communicating corporate social responsibility through the internet and social
media”, in Ihlen, Øyvind, Bartlett, J. and May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and
Corporate Social Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, pp. 358-378.
Caruana, R. and Chatzidakis, A. (2014), “Consumer social responsibility (CnSR): toward a multi-level,
multi-agent conceptualization of the ‘other CSR’ ”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 121 No. 4,
pp. 577-592.
Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R. and Mahajan, V. (2007), “Form versus function: how the intensities of
specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade-offs mediate product preferences”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 702-714.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2015), “Two-minute drill: video games and social media to advance
CSR”, in Adi, A., Grigore, G. and Crowther, D. (Eds), Corporate Social Responsibility in the Digital
Age, Vol. 7, Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility, Emerald, Bingley,
pp. 127-142.
Crane, A. and Glozer, S. (2016), “Researching corporate social responsibility communication: themes,
opportunities and challenges”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 53 No. 7, pp. 1223-1252.
de Bakker, F.G. (2015), “Online activism, CSR and institutional change”, in Uldam, J. and Vestergaard, A.
(Eds), Civic Engagement and Social Media: Political Participation Beyond Protest, Springer, Berlin,
pp. 23-43.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), “The general causality orientations scale: self-determination in
personality”, Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 109-134.
De Groot, J.I. and Steg, L. (2009), “Morality and prosocial behavior: the role of awareness, responsibility,
and norms in the norm activation model”, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 149 No. 4,
pp. 425-449.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R. and Nacke, L. (2011), “From game design elements to gamefulness:
defining gamification”, paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th International Academic
MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, pp. 9-15.
Dhar, R. and Wertenbroch, K. (2000), “Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods”, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 60-71.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2010), “Maximizing business returns to corporate social
responsibility (CSR): the role of CSR communication”, International Journal of Management
Reviews, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 8-19.
Etzioni, A. (1999), “Voluntary simplicity: characterization, select psychological implications, and
societal consequences”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 619-652.
Fieseler, C., Fleck, M. and Meckel, M. (2010), “Corporate social responsibility in the blogosphere”, Challenges of
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 91 No. 4, pp. 599-614. gamifying CSR
Froehlich, J. (2014), “Gamifying green: gamification and environmental sustainability”, in Walz, S.P. communication
and Deterding, S. (Eds), The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, pp. 563-596.
Gordon, E. and Baldwin-Philippi, J. (2014), “Playful civic learning: enabling lateral trust and reflection
in game-based public participation”, International Journal of Communication, Vol. 8, pp. 759-786. 61
Groh, F. (2012), “Gamification: state of the art definition and utilization”, Proceedings of the 4th Seminar
on Research Trends in Media Informatics, pp. 39-46.
Hamari, J. (2013), “Transforming homo economicus into homo ludens: a field experiment on
gamification in a utilitarian peer-to-peer trading service”, Electronic Commerce Research and
Applications, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 236-245.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J. and Sarsa, H. (2014), “Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical
studies on gamification”, paper presented at the 47th Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences (HICSS), HI, pp. 3025-3034.
Huotari, K. and Hamari, J. (2012), “Defining gamification: a service marketing perspective”, paper
presented at the Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference, Tampere,
pp. 17-22.
Knaving, K. and Björk, S. (2013), “Designing for fun and play: exploring possibilities in design for
gamification”, paper presented at the Proceedings of the First International Conference on
Gameful Design, Research, and Applications, Stratford, pp. 131-134.
Koivisto, J. and Hamari, J. (2014), “Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 35, pp. 179-188.
Kollmuss, A. and Agyeman, J. (2002), “Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are
the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?”, Environmental Education Research, Vol. 8 No. 3,
pp. 239-260.
Kozinets, R.V. (2002), “Can consumers escape the market? Emancipatory illuminations from burning
man”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 20-38.
Landers, R.N. (2014), “Developing a theory of gamified learning: linking serious games and
gamification of learning”, Simulation & Gaming, Vol. 45 No. 6, pp. 752-768.
Liu, D., Santhanam, R. and Webster, J. (2016), “Towards meaningful engagement: a framework for design
and research of gamified information systems”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 1011-1034.
Maan, J. (2013), “Social business transformation through gamification”, International Journal of
Managing Information Technology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 9-16.
Maloney, M.P., Ward, M.P. and Braucht, G.N. (1975), “A revised scale for the measurement of ecological
attitudes and knowledge”, American Psychologist, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 787-790.
Mavletova, A. (2015), “Web surveys among children and adolescents: is there a gamification effect?”,
Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 372-398.
Mittal, B. (1995), “A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involvement”, Psychology &
Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 7, pp. 663-682.
Morozov, E. (2009), “From slacktivism to activism”, Foreign Policy, September 5, available at: https://
foreignpolicy.com/2009/09/05/from-slacktivism-to-activism/ (accessed November 26, 2018).
Morsing, M., Schultz, M. and Nielsen, K.U. (2008), “The ‘Catch 22’of communicating CSR: findings from
a Danish study”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 97-111.
Müller-Stewens, J., Schlager, T., Häubl, G. and Herrmann, A. (2017), “Gamified information presentation
and consumer adoption of product innovations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 8-24.
Rigby, S. and Ryan, R.M. (2011), Glued to Games: How Video Games Draw us in and Hold us Spellbound:
How Video Games Draw us in and Hold us Spellbound, ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA.
CCIJ Robson, K., Plangger, K., Kietzmann, J.H., McCarthy, I. and Pitt, L. (2015), “Is it all a game?
24,1 Understanding the principles of gamification”, Business Horizons, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 411-420.
Roth, S., Schneckenberg, D. and Tsai, C.W. (2015), “The ludic drive as innovation driver: introduction to
the gamification of innovation”, Creativity and Innovation Management, Vol. 24 No. 2,
pp. 300-306.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2008), “From ego depletion to vitality: theory and findings concerning the
facilitation of energy available to the self”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Vol. 2
62 No. 2, pp. 702-717.
Schaefer, A. and Crane, A. (2005), “Addressing sustainability and consumption”, Journal of
Macromarketing, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 76-92.
Schwartz, S.H. (1970), “Elicitation of moral obligation and self-sacrificing behavior: an experimental
study of volunteering to be a bone marrow donor”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 283-293.
Schwartz, S.H. (1973), “Normative explanations of helping behavior: a critique, proposal, and empirical
test”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 349-364.
Schwartz, S.H. (1977), “Normative influences on altruism”, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
Vol. 10, pp. 221-279.
Seaborn, K. and Fels, D.I. (2015), “Gamification in theory and action: a survey”, International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 74, pp. 14-31.
Stott, A. and Neustaedter, C. (2013), “Analysis of gamification in education”, Surrey, p. 8.
Strahilevitz, M. and Myers, J.G. (1998), “Donations to charity as purchase incentives: how well they
work may depend on what you are trying to sell”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 434-446.
Turaga, R.M.R., Howarth, R.B. and Borsuk, M.E. (2010), “Pro-environmental behavior”, Annals of the
New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 1185 No. 1, pp. 211-224.
VanVoorhis, C.W. and Morgan, B.L. (2007), “Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining
sample sizes”, Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 43-50.
Veltsos, J.R. (2017), “Gamification in the business communication course”, Business and Professional
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 80 No. 2, pp. 194-216.
Vesa, M., Hamari, J., Harviainen, J.T. and Warmelink, H. (2017), “Computer games and organization
studies”, Organization Studies, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 273-284.
Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M.C. (2001), “Shopping online for freedom, control, and fun”, California
Management Review, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 34-55.
Zichermann, G. and Linder, J. (2013), The Gamification Revolution: How Leaders Leverage Game
Mechanics to Crush the Competition, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Corresponding author
Christian Fieseler can be contacted at: christian.fieseler@bi.no

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

Organization-
How different CSR dimensions employee
impact organization-employee relationships

relationships
The moderating role of CSR-culture fit 63

Zifei Fay Chen Received 12 July 2018

Revised 28 October 2018
University of San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA Accepted 29 October 2018
Cheng Hong
Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA, and
Aurora Occa
University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA

Abstract
Purpose – Drawing on interdisciplinary insights from stakeholder theory, relationship management and
organizational justice, the purpose of this paper is to examine corporate social responsibility (CSR) from an
internal and relational perspective. Specifically, it examines the effects of CSR in overall as well as the
discretionary, ethical, legal and economic CSR dimensions on organization–employee relationships,
respectively. The moderating role of employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit on these effects was also explored.
Design/methodology/approach – An online survey was conducted with 303 participants from the USA
who were full-time employees at for-profit organizations.
Findings – Results indicate that CSR performance in overall positively influences organization–employee
relationships, and such effect is amplified as employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit increases. Discretionary
and ethical CSR positively influence organization–employee relationships, but perceived CSR-culture fit only
amplifies the influence from ethical CSR. For legal and economic CSR, the effects on organization–employee
relationships are only significant when perceived CSR-culture fit is high.
Research limitations/implications – This study extends the body of knowledge of CSR and internal
relationship management. However, the limitations regarding the factors from culture, business sectors and
organizational setting should be addressed in future studies through both quantitative and qualitative approaches.
Originality/value – This study provides a comprehensive understanding of the effects from four different
CSR dimensions on organization–employee relationships as well as how such effects were moderated by
employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit. Integrating interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks, this study offers
insights for corporate communications and public relations professionals on how to effectively build and
cultivate relationships with employees through different dimensions of CSR.
Keywords Corporate social responsibility, CSR-culture fit, Organization-employee relationships
Paper type Research paper

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has attracted growing scholarly attention in the fields
of corporate communications, public relations, advertising and marketing (Kim, 2011).
Rooted in stakeholder theory (Carroll, 1991; Freeman, 1984), CSR addresses a company’s
long-term value through its relationships with various stakeholders including customers,
investors and employees (Wheeler and Sillanpää, 1997). However, to date, most existing
research on CSR has focused on external stakeholders, especially customers or consumers
(e.g. Brown and Dacin, 1997; Kim, 2011; Schmeltz, 2012; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001).
Except for some studies in the areas of management and organizational behavior (e.g.
Aguilera et al., 2007; Lee et al., 2013), the impact of CSR on organizations’ internal climates
Corporate Communications: An
and stakeholders such as employees has been relatively understudied (Dhanesh, 2012). Such International Journal
contrast is problematic because employees, as a salient stakeholder group, have the power Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 63-78
and legitimacy to influence their companies (Greenwood, 2007), and can perform as credible © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
spokespersons for companies and brands (Men and Stacks, 2013). Research evidence from DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-07-2018-0078
CCIJ the industry also supported the importance of engaging employees through CSR. In the
24,1 Millennial Employee Engagement Study, Cone Communications (2016) found that
75 percent of millennial employees surveyed were willing to take a pay cut to work for a
responsible company and 88 percent claimed to have more fulfilling jobs if they were
provided opportunities to make a positive impact.
To ethically engage employees and drive organizational justice, more focus on employees is
64 called for in CSR research (Aguilera et al., 2007; May, 2008). Following this call, Dhanesh (2012,
2014) examined the influence of CSR on employees’ commitment and relational outcomes. The
empirical evidence from information technology companies in India illustrated the effect of CSR
on organization–employee relationships (Dhanesh, 2014), suggesting that social responsibility
should be incorporated as a relationship management strategy (Kelly, 2001; Waters, 2009) from
the internal perspective. Dhanesh’s (2012, 2014) work helped lay the ground for further
investigation of CSR from an internal and relational perspective, yet gaps still exist in current
literature. First, the definition and operationalization of CSR in academic research is yet to be
consolidated. While some studies consider CSR as companies’ effort to fulfill perceived
obligations from various stakeholders and society at large (e.g. Coombs and Holladay, 2012),
some regard CSR as activities that companies facilitate in order to build better organizational
image and drive financial gains (Drucker, 1984). Such inconsistency makes it difficult to
understand and interpret the impact of CSR. Moreover, merely focusing on image-oriented and
monetary-driven outcomes can be problematic for ethical stakeholder engagement as such
perceptions are not set for the long-term values. Second, from an internal perspective, very few
studies have taken into consideration the role of perceived fit in CSR research. To examine the
specific situations under which CSR initiatives are effective, a considerable amount of scholarly
attention has been paid to the effects of perceived fit, yet most studies on this revolve around
the cause-brand fit for consumers (e.g. Bigné-Alcañiz et al., 2012; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001).
As an important factor that influences the effects of CSR, the congruence between corporate
culture and CSR should also be examined from the internal perspective (Lee et al., 2013).
To fill the aforementioned gaps and drawing on interdisciplinary insights from
stakeholder theory, relationship management and organizational justice, this study adopts
Carroll’s (1991) comprehensive definition of CSR and sets out to examine the effects of CSR
and specifically, four different CSR dimensions (i.e. discretionary, ethical, legal and
economic) on organization–employee relationships. It also incorporates employees’
perceived CSR-culture fit as a potential moderator of these effects. Findings from this
study can help extend the body of knowledge of CSR from an internal and relational
perspective, and can help provide practical guidelines for corporations to effectively build,
nurture and maintain relationships with employees through CSR.

Literature review
CSR and the stakeholder theory
CSR can be broadly conceptualized as companies’ commitment to benefit the welfare of
society and the activities conducted (i.e. doing good) to meet perceived society obligations
(Brown and Dacin, 1997; Davis and Blomstrom, 1975; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001).
However, specifically, different focuses and definitions of CSR exist in previous studies.
According to Dhanesh (2014), the myriad definitions can be categorized into two major
categories. The first considers CSR as a resource designated to increase companies’ profits
and financial gains (e.g. Drucker, 1984), whereas the second considers CSR as corporations’
obligations to the values and objectives of society at large (Dhanesh, 2012, 2014).
To consolidate the different perspectives and the economic and social orientations,
Carroll (1991) proposed a comprehensive definition of CSR that embodies a four-part
conceptualization. A pyramid of CSR was therefore introduced to portray the four
components of CSR (Carroll, 1991). The economic responsibility is the basic building block
and refers to a company’s ability to be profitable. The next level is businesses’ legal Organization-
responsibility that refers to the expectations for a company to obey the law and to “play by employee
the rules of the game” (Carroll, 1991, p. 42). The third level is businesses’ ethical relationships
responsibility that addresses the importance for a company to respect and adapt to the
ethical norms and expectations from society. Finally, the discretionary/philanthropic
responsibility refers to a company’s responses to the societal expectations of being a good
citizen (Carroll, 1991; Dhanesh, 2014). 65
This study follows Carroll’s (1991) definition of CSR that encompasses the four different
dimensions for two primary reasons. First, Carroll’s (1991) definition of CSR has been
adopted in previous studies from internal perspectives (e.g. Dhanesh, 2012, 2014). Second,
this definition is based on stakeholder theory, a foundation that necessitates research on
CSR from the internal perspective. A stakeholder is “any group or individual who can affect
or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” (Freeman, 1984, p. 46).
The stakeholder theory stresses on the importance of addressing interests from a broad set
of stakeholders, rather than merely shareholders (Freeman, 1984). This emphasis calls for
adaptation of a holistic view of CSR that incorporates different dimensions of
responsibilities into a firm’s core operations (Argenti, 2013; Werther and Chandler, 2011).
In the conceptualization of the CSR pyramid, Carroll (1991) pointed out that stakeholder
theory help delineate the “societal members who are most urgent to businesses, and to
whom it must be responsive” (p. 43). As an important group of stakeholders, employees who
are in good relationships with their organizations are more likely to establish positive
performance (Kim and Rhee, 2011) and can become the driving force to create advocacy at
scale to build the authentic enterprise (Arthur W. Page Society, 2007). As such, employees
bare the legitimacy and power to influence organization’s decision making. Therefore, it is
important to examine the impact of different CSR dimensions as identified in Carroll’s (1991)
pyramid from an internal perspective focusing on employee stakeholders.

CSR and organization–employee relationships: the mechanism of organizational justice

Resonating with the stakeholder theory, the relationship management theory in public
relations addresses the essence of public relations efforts that take into account the
functions and values both within the organization and the society at large (Ledingham and
Bruning, 2000). The concept of strategic publics in public relations literature (e.g. Hon and
Grunig, 1999) is similar to that of stakeholders in management literature (Dhanesh, 2012).
Specifically, employees are a strategic public that merit attention from both the academy
and the profession for organizations to cultivate positive relationships with (Men and
Stacks, 2014).
Under the relationship management paradigm, public relations scholars have proposed an
important construct – organization–public relationships (OPR). OPR is defined as “the pattern
of interaction, transaction, exchange, and linkage between an organization and its publics”
(Broom et al., 2000, p. 18). To measure OPR, Hon and Grunig (1999) created a scale that
consists of control mutuality, trust, commitment and satisfaction. Control mutuality
emphasizes on “the rightful power to influence one another” (Hon and Grunig, 1999, p. 3) and
refers to the extent to which parties agree on that. Trust refers to the confidence and
willingness of relating parties to open to one another. Commitment refers to the extent to
which the relationship is felt worth maintaining and promoting. Satisfaction refers to the level
of favorable feelings. This scale has been validated and widely adopted to measure OPR in
previous studies under different organizations contexts and with various strategic publics
(e.g. Dhanesh, 2014; Li and Li, 2014; Men and Stacks, 2014; Seltzer et al., 2012). This study
adopts this measure and follows Men (2014) and Men and Stacks (2014) by operationalizing
organization–employee relationships as the extent to which control mutuality, trust,
commitment and satisfaction are obtained between an organization and its employees.
CCIJ Although previous studies have identified various antecedents of positive
24,1 organization–employee relationships, the influence of CSR on internal relationship
building still remains understudied (Dhanesh, 2014). This study draws insights from
organizational justice to examine the impact of CSR on organization–employee
relationships. Organizational justice literature posits that employees’ attitude and
behavior toward organizations are impacted by their perception of the fairness in
66 organizational actions (Cropanzano et al., 2001; Rupp et al., 2006). An organization’s CSR
performance, in this regard, provides heuristic cues through which employees evaluate their
employers’ fairness (Aguilera et al., 2007). Fairer perception of organizational behavior
would lead to more positive attitude and behavior among employees (Rupp et al., 2006).
Previous studies revealed positive impact of perceived company CSR performance on
employees’ organizational identification (Carmeli et al., 2007), commitment (Collier and
Esteban, 2007; Dhanesh, 2012), engagement (Glavas and Piderit, 2009) and job satisfaction
(Vlachos et al., 2013). In addition, companies’ CSR efforts may be seen as “in-house” justice
judgments for employees to build trust with their employers (Rupp, 2011). As fairer
organizational processes help lead to more accurate prediction of organizational actions,
higher perception of CSR performance can also positively influence employees’ instrumental
motive as their need for control is met (Aguilera et al., 2007; Rupp, 2011). Based on the
mechanism of organizational justice, it can be inferred that employees’ perception of
companies’ CSR performance helps lead to more positive commitment, trust, satisfaction
and control mutuality with their companies, resulting in better organization–employee
relationships:
H1. Employees’ judgment of companies’ CSR performance positively influences
organization–employee relationships.
However, as CSR encompasses multiple dimensions, the overall influence of CSR
performance on organization–employee relationships may over-simplify such effects.
Dhanesh (2012) found that different dimensions of CSR had varied effects on employees’
organizational commitment. Yet to date few studies have investigated the specific effects
from different CSR dimensions. This study thus takes a step further to seek the effects from
discretionary, ethical, legal and economic CSR on organization–employee relationships:
RQ1. How do employees’ perceptions of companies’ a) discretionary, b) ethical, c) legal,
and d) economic CSR influence organization–employee relationships?

Perceived fit between CSR and corporate culture

Previous research has generally shown the positive impact of CSR on various stakeholders’
attitudinal and behavioral outcomes, but such positive impact does not always pertain
under certain conditions (Chen et al., 2017; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Studies suggest
that the effects of CSR may be further influenced by many factors, such as stakeholders’
belief in CSR, perceived importance of the CSR cause, and perceived CSR fit (e.g. Du et al.,
2010; Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Among these factors, the role of perceived fit has drawn
a considerable scholarly attention. Perceived fit refers to the transferability and
compatibility among different domains (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). Empirical evidence
from previous studies show that CSR fit serves as a moderator between CSR initiatives and
stakeholders’ responses. When consumers perceive high cause-brand fit, positive influence
of CSR associations on the formation of brand attitude can be amplified (e.g. Bigné-Alcañiz
et al., 2012; Menon and Kahn, 2003). However, research on the moderation effect of perceived
fit is still lacking from the internal perspective.
Focusing on employees’ perceived fit, Lee et al. (2013) pointed out that the alignment
of an organization’s strategy and culture is a key concern in building corporate brand
and reputation. This study follows Lee et al. (2013) and specifically focuses on the Organization-
moderating role of employees’ perceived fit between CSR and corporate culture. employee
The perceived CSR-culture fit is operationalized as “the extent to which people believe relationships
that CSR activities are congruent with the culture of the organization or corporation”
(Lee et al., 2013, p. 1717).
Although employees and consumers are different stakeholder groups, they both go
through the cognitive attribution process after learning CSR initiatives (Bögel, 2015; Du 67
et al., 2010; Haley, 1996; Menon and Kahn, 2003). People would initially attribute CSR
initiatives to intrinsic motives of the company (e.g. value and culture); after that, if they
engage in more elaboration of the information, they may change decisions by attributing
such CSR initiatives to extrinsic motives (e.g. financial motivation) (Du et al., 2010). When
there exists higher incongruence between a company’s CSR activities and corporate culture,
people are more likely to experience elaborated processing of the information. Low
CSR-culture fit, in this regard, would result in attribution of CSR to more extrinsic and
self-serving motives (Du et al., 2010), whereas high CSR-culture fit is more likely to enhance
employees’ commitment and engagement with the organization (Chong, 2009;
Lee et al., 2013). Therefore:
H2. Employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit moderates the effects of their judgment of
companies’ CSR performance on organization–employee relationships; such effect
would be amplified as perceived CSR-culture fit increases.
Since CSR encompasses different dimensions which may have varied effects on
organization–employee relationships, the second research question is asked to further
investigate how employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit moderates the effects from different
CSR dimensions:
RQ2. How does employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit moderate the effects of a)
discretionary, b) ethical, c) legal, and d) economic CSR on organization–employee
relationships?
To consolidate the prosed hypotheses and research questions and further elucidate
their inter-relationships, the conceptual model being examined in this study is depicted
in Figure 1.

Perceived CSR-culture fit

H2

RQ2a

RQ2b

RQ2c
RQ2d

Overall CSR
H1
performance

Discretionary CSR RQ1

a

RQ1b Organization-
Ethical CSR
employee
relationships
RQ1c
Legal CSR
d
RQ1
Economic CSR Figure 1.
Conceptual model
CCIJ Method
24,1 Data collection
Quantitative survey method was used to test the proposed hypotheses and answer the
research questions. An online survey questionnaire was created using the survey software
Qualtrics and the survey link was distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk).
On MTurk, requesters are able to recruit participants by posting human intelligence tasks
68 (HITs) when paying a small amount of monetary incentives. Requesters on MTurk are
allowed to approve or reject a specific HIT based on its quality. For this survey, a randomly
generated code was prompted upon completion of the survey to verify participation and
offer small incentives. MTurk has been regarded as a new source to obtain high-quality yet
inexpensive data for social sciences research (Buhrmester et al., 2011). Studies have
suggested similarities between MTurk and traditional samples (Buhrmester et al., 2011;
Goodman et al., 2013; Mason and Suri, 2012). Previous studies have used traditional samples
recruited through sampling firms to examine internal communication (e.g. Men, 2014; Men
and Stacks, 2014). To obtain data with better quality on MTurk, the use of screening
questions and attention checks are recommended (Goodman et al., 2013). Therefore, the
sample obtained through MTurk after applying the screening criteria and attention checks
was deemed appropriate for this study.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria. Previous scholars suggested the adoption of 90 percent
and above approval rate of tasks done by MTurk workers for behavioral research (Mason and
Suri, 2012). This study requested an approval rate of 95 percent and above from workers, and
restricted location to be only in the USA. A brief screening questionnaire was used to
determine participants’ eligibility for the main study. Four criteria were used for screening
purposes: participants had to be employed at the time of the survey, participants had to be full-
time employees, they had to be employed by for-profit organizations and the organizations had
to have more than 50 employees. One attention check question was included. A total of 670
participants were initially recruited. After filtering through the above-mentioned screening
criteria and attention check question, a final sample of 303 participants were retained.

Participants
Among the 303 participants included in the final sample, 114 (37.6 percent) were female and
189 (62.4 percent) were male. The average age was 32.88 (SD ¼ 10.44), and the average
tenure for current employment is 5.49 years (SD ¼ 4.858). The majority of the participants
held a bachelor’s degree (50.8 percent), worked in a non-management position (50.2 percent),
and had an annual income of below $50,000 (54.8 percent). Participants were from various
industry types and business sectors such as technology, finance, entertainment, healthcare
and consumer products.

Measures
All measures of the key constructs included in the study were adapted from previous
research and were measured based seven-point Likert-type scales ranging from “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree.” The measure of employees’ perception of their companies’
CSR performance consisted of 21 items and was adapted from Maignan and Ferrell (2000)
and Dhanesh (2014) (α ¼ 0.93). Four dimensions were included: discretionary CSR (α ¼ 0.90),
ethical CSR (α ¼ 0.86), legal CSR measured (α ¼ 0.83) and economic CSR (α ¼ 0.70).
The measure of organization–employee relationships was adapted from Hon and Grunig
(1999) and consisted of 21 items in total (α ¼ 0.97). It contained four dimensions: control
mutuality (α ¼ 0.76), trust (α ¼ 0.92), commitment (α ¼ 0.94) and satisfaction (α ¼ 0.96).
Perceived CSR-culture fit was measured by four items adapted from Cable and DeRue
(2002) such as “my company’s CSR activities are relevant to our corporate culture”
(α ¼ 0.94). Several factors that may affect the organization–employee relationships were Organization-
controlled in this study, including years of tenure in the company, age, income and current employee
position held. relationships
Results
To answer the proposed hypotheses and research questions, a series of hierarchical multiple
regressions were analyzed. Mean centering was used to minimize the collinearity problem in 69
multiple regressions. See Table I for means and standard deviations (before mean
centering), as well as Cronbach’s α of CSR performance, organization–employee
relationships and perceived fit constructs.

Overall CSR influence on organization–employee relationships

The two hypotheses proposed the effect from employees’ overall judgment of companies’
CSR performance on organization–employee relationships and the moderating role of
perceived CSR-culture fit. Hierarchical regression was employed to test the hypotheses. In
the first model, the dependent variable was regressed onto the control variables (i.e. years of
tenure in the current company, age, income, and current position held), which accounted for
a significant amount of variance in organization–employee relationships, ΔR2 ¼ 0.062,
F (6, 289) ¼ 3.19, p ¼ 0.005. In the second model, the dependent variable was regressed onto
control variables, CSR performance with four dimensions combined, perceived CSR-culture
fit and the interaction term of overall CSR performance and perceived CSR-culture fit.
The second model accounted for a significant additional 45.7 percent of the variance,
ΔR2 ¼ 0.457, F (3, 286) ¼ 90.69, p o0.001. Employees’ judgment of companies’ overall CSR
performance significantly predicted organization–employee relationships, β ¼ 0.563,
t ¼ 9.96, p o0.001. H1 was supported. In addition, the interaction of overall CSR
performance and perceived CSR-culture fit was also significant, β ¼ 0.087, t ¼ 2.25,
p ¼ 0.025, indicating that perceived fit acts as a moderator for the effect of CSR performance
on organization–employee relationships. The positive effect of CSR performance is
amplified as perceived CSR-culture fit increases. H2 was supported. To further demonstrate
the interaction pattern, Figure 2 was plotted. One standard deviation above and below the
mean was used to depict high and low perceptions of CSR performance and fit.

The impact from different CSR dimensions

To examine the impact of different CSR dimensions on organization–employee relationships
and how perceived CSR-culture fit moderates the effect from each dimension, a series of
hierarchical regression models were tested, focusing on each CSR dimension. In each set of
the models, the focal CSR dimension, perceived CSR-culture fit, as well as their interaction
were tested after controlling for the control variables and other dimensions.
Discretionary CSR. The hierarchical regression models were tested to examine the impact
of discretionary CSR on organization–employee relationships (RQ1a) and how perceived
CSR-culture fit moderates this effect (RQ2a). In the base model, the dependent variable was
regressed onto the control variables. In the second model, the dependent variable was
regressed onto the control variables and ethical, legal, and economic CSR dimensions, which
accounted for an additional 37 percent of the variance, ΔR2 ¼ 0.370, F (3, 286) ¼ 61.97,
p o0.001. In the third model, discretionary CSR, perceived CSR-culture fit, and their
interaction term were added, which accounted for a significant additional 9.8 percent of the
variance, ΔR2 ¼ 0.098, F (3, 283) ¼ 19.72, p o0.001. Discretionary CSR significantly
influenced organization–employee relationships, β ¼ 0.344, t ¼ 5.87, p o0.001. But the
interaction between discretionary CSR and perceived CSR-culture fit was not significant,
β ¼ 0.049, t ¼ 1.34, p ¼ 0.181, indicating there is no moderation effect.
CCIJ Constructs and items Mean SD α
24,1
Overall CSR performance 0.93
Discretionary CSR 0.90
This company gives adequate contribution to charities 4.87 1.65
This company supports private and/or public educational institutions 4.63 1.64
This company has a program in place to reduce the amount of energy and materials
70 wasted in its business 4.60 1.68
This company participates in activities that aim to protect and/or improve the quality of
the natural environment 4.48 1.69
This company encourages partnerships with local businesses 4.71 1.64
This company implements special programs to minimize its negative impact on the
natural environment 4.47 1.65
This company supports employees who acquire additional education 5.05 1.64
This company has flexible policies that enable employees to better co-ordinate work and
personal life 4.84 1.64
Ethical CSR 0.86
This company has a comprehensive code of conduct 5.61 1.29
This company is recognized as a trustworthy company 5.55 1.34
In this company, fairness toward co-workers and/or business partners is an integral part
of the employee evaluation process 5.29 1.48
The salespersons and employees of this company are required to provide full and accurate
information to all customers 5.50 1.40
This company has a confidential procedure in place for employees to report any
misconduct at work 5.45 1.41
Legal CSR 0.83
This company seeks to comply with all laws regulating hiring and employee benefits 5.87 1.14
This company has internal policies that prevent discrimination in employees’
compensation and promotion 5.53 1.38
The managers of this company try to comply with the law 5.80 1.23
This company has programs that encourage the diversity of its workforce 5.32 1.43
Economic CSR 0.70
This company has been successful at maximizing its profits 5.59 1.21
This company strives to lower its operating costs 5.72 1.20
The top management of this company establishes long-term strategies for the business 5.61 1.21
This company closely monitors employees’ productivity 5.52 1.32
Organization–employee relationships 0.97
Control mutuality 0.76
This company and I are attentive to what each other say 4.78 1.54
This organization believes my opinions are legitimate 4.88 1.55
In dealing with me, this company has a tendency to throw its weight around 4.14 1.63
This company really listens to what I have to say 4.57 1.59
This company really listens to what I have to say 4.45 1.70
Trust 0.92
This company treats me fairly and justly 5.23 1.45
Whenever this company makes an important decision, I know it will be concerned about me 4.36 1.74
This company can be relied on to keep its promises 4.93 1.58
I believe that this company takes my opinions into account when making decisions 4.42 1.75
I feel very confident about this company’s skills 5.15 1.50
This company has the ability to accomplish what it says it will do 5.40 1.36
Commitment 0.94
Table I. I feel that this company is trying to maintain a long-term commitment to me 4.65 1.69
Means, standard I can see that this company wants to maintain a relationship with me 4.74 1.69
deviations, and There is a long-lasting bond between this company and me 4.59 1.75
Cronbach’s α of CSR, Compared to other organizations, I value my relationship with this company more 4.76 1.76
employee–organization I would rather work together with this company than not 5.17 1.55
relationships and
perceived
fit constructs (continued )
Constructs and items Mean SD α
Organization-
employee
Satisfaction 0.96 relationships
I am happy with this company 5.07 1.63
Both the company and I benefit from the relationship 5.33 1.46
I am happy in my interactions with this company 5.09 1.55
Generally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship this company has established
with me 5.07 1.54 71
I enjoy dealing with this company 5.02 1.61
Perceived CSR-culture fit 0.94
Our company’s CSR activities are congruent with our corporate culture 5.20 1.23
Our company’s CSR activities are relevant to our corporate culture 5.29 1.26
Our company’s CSR activities are similar to our corporate culture 5.26 1.21
Our company’s CSR activities reflect our corporate culture 5.29 1.28 Table I.

1.6 Low fit (–1)

1.4 High fit (+1)

1.2
Organization–employee

1
relationships

0.8
0.6
0.4 Figure 2.
0.2 Moderating role of
perceived CSR-culture
0 fit on the effect of
Low CSR performance High CSR performance overall CSR
–0.2 (–1) (+1) performance on
organization–
Note: The “+1” and “–1” indicate one standard deviation employee relationships
above and below the mean

Ethical CSR. Similar steps of the hierarchical multiple regressions were employed to
examine the effects of ethical CSR on organization–employee relationships (RQ1b) and how
perceived CSR-culture fit moderates this effect (RQ2b). Ethical CSR, perceived CSR-culture
fit, and their interaction in total accounted for a significant additional 5.4 percent of the
variance, after controlling for the control variables and the other three CSR dimensions
(i.e. discretionary, legal and economic), ΔR2 ¼ 0.054, F (3, 283) ¼ 11.02, p o0.001. Ethical
CSR significantly influenced organization–employee relationships, β ¼ 0.333, t ¼ 4.37,
p o0.001. In addition, the interaction term of ethical CSR and perceived CSR-culture fit was
also significant, β ¼ 0.080, t ¼ 2.20, p ¼ 0.029, indicating a moderating effect. As perceived
CSR-culture fit increases, the impact of ethical CSR on organization–employee relationships
is amplified. Figure 3 shows the interaction effect following similar plotting procedures
for Figure 2.
Legal CSR. Hierarchical regression models were tested to examine the effects of legal CSR
on organization–employee relationships (RQ1c) and how perceived CSR-culture fit
moderates this effect (RQ2c). Legal CSR, perceived CSR-culture fit, and their interaction
term in total accounted for a significant additional 2.5 percent of the variance, after
controlling for the control variables and the other three CSR dimensions (i.e. discretionary,
ethical and economic), ΔR2 ¼ 0.025, F (3, 283) ¼ 5.07, p ¼ 0.002. Legal CSR performance did
CCIJ 1.6
Low fit (–1)
24,1 1.4 High fit (+1)

Organization–employee
1.2

relationships
0.8
72
0.6

0.4
Figure 3.
Moderating role of 0.2
perceived CSR-culture
fit on the effect of 0
ethical CSR on Low ethical CSR (–1) High ethical CSR (+1)
organization–
employee relationships Note: The “+1” and “–1” indicate one standard deviation
above and below the mean

not significantly influence organization–employee relationships, β ¼ 0.049, t ¼ 0.633,

p ¼ 0.528. However, the interaction of legal CSR and perceived CSR-culture fit was
significant, β ¼ 0.118, t ¼ 2.95, p ¼ 0.003, indicating that perceived CSR-culture fit acts as a
moderator for the effect of legal CSR performance on organization–employee relationships.
This moderation indicated that legal CSR only became effective on enhancing
organization–employee relationships when perceived CSR-culture fit was high
(see Figure 4 plotted using similar procedures for the interaction effect).
Economic CSR. Finally, the effects of economic CSR on organization–employee
relationships (RQ1d) and the moderation of perceived CSR-culture fit on this effect (RQ2d)
were tested. Economic CSR performance, perceived fit and their interaction in total
accounted for a significant additional 1.8 percent of the variance, after controlling for the
control variables and the other three CSR dimensions (i.e. discretionary, ethical and legal),
ΔR2 ¼ 0.018, F (3, 283) ¼ 5.07, p ¼ 0.012. Economic CSR performance did not significantly
influence organization–employee relationships, β ¼ 0.023, t ¼ 0.419, p ¼ 0.676. However,
the interaction between economic CSR and perceived CSR-culture fit was significant,
β ¼ 0.091, t ¼ 2.15, p ¼ 0.032, qualifying the moderating effect. Similar to that of legal

1.6
Low fit (–1)
1.4 High fit (+1)
Organization–employee

1.2

1
relationships

0.8

0.6

0.4

Figure 4. 0.2
Moderating role of
perceived fit on the 0
effect of legal CSR on Low legal CSR (–1) High legal CSR (+1)
organization–
employee relationships Note: The “+1” and “–1” indicate one standard deviation
above and below the mean
CSR, this moderation indicated that economic CSR was only effective on improving Organization-
organization–employee relationships when perceived CSR-culture fit was high employee
(see Figure 5 plotted using similar procedures for the interaction effect). relationships
Discussion
This study examines CSR from the internal and relationship management perspectives
and provides empirical support for social responsibility to be incorporated by 73
corporations to build and nurture organization–employee relationships (Dhanesh, 2014;
Kelly, 2001). Drawing on interdisciplinary theoretical insights from stakeholder theory,
relationship management and organizational justice, it advances understanding of CSR
from an internal perspective and helps address the effects from different CSR dimensions
on organization–employee relationships. Furthermore, by incorporating employees’
perceived CSR-culture fit into this framework, this study offers insights regarding the
situations under which discretionary, ethical, legal and economic CSR may or may not
work in cultivating relationships with employees.
Consistent with previous findings regarding the positive influence of CSR on employees’
attitudinal and behavioral outcomes (e.g. Carmeli et al., 2007; Dhanesh, 2012, 2014; Glavas and
Piderit, 2009; Vlachos et al., 2013), findings from this study further supported that employees’
judgment of their companies’ CSR performance in overall positively impacted
organizational–employee relationships. In addition, the amplifying moderating effect of
perceived CSR-culture fit that was found among consumers (e.g. Bigné-Alcañiz et al., 2012) also
applied to employee stakeholders in this study. These findings support the importance of CSR in
internal relationship management for corporate communications, and offer converging support
for organizational justice from the fields of organizational behavior and management. That is, a
company’s CSR provides cues for employees to evaluate the fairness of organizational actions
(Aguilera et al., 2007). As perceived CSR-culture fit increases, the fairness is more likely to be
considered as companies’ intrinsic culture and values (Du et al., 2010), thus enhancing the
positive employee relationships outcomes generated by CSR.
More importantly, findings from this study demonstrate that different CSR dimensions
would have varied effects on organization–employee relationships, and the moderating role of
employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit was also found to be different for the four CSR
dimensions. Such findings resonate with Dhanesh’s (2012, 2014) argument that CSR should
not be examined as a unidimensional construct. Findings show that while discretionary and
ethical CSR have significant influence on organization–employee relationships, the amplifying

1.6
Low fit (–1)
1.4 High fit (+1)
Organization–employee

1.2

1
relationships

0.8

0.6
Figure 5.
0.4 Moderating role of
0.2 perceived CSR-culture
fit on the effect of
0 economic CSR
Low economic CSR (–1) High economic CSR (+1) performance on
organization–
Note: The “+1” and “–1” indicate one standard deviation employee relationships
above and below the mean
CCIJ moderating effect of perceived CSR-culture fit was only found for ethical CSR. The effects
24,1 from legal and economic CSR were both significantly moderated by employees’ perceived
CSR-culture fit. Specifically, legal and economic dimensions would only work in generating
positive organization–employee relationships when perceived CSR-culture fit was high.
According to insights from the organizational justice literature, discretionary CSR is
likely to be associated with third-party justice, which refers to individuals’ evaluation of
74 how fair other people are treated (Aguilera et al., 2007; Rupp et al., 2006). Employees’
judgment of their companies’ discretionary or philanthropic CSR performance shows their
evaluation of companies’ fair treatment to other parties in the society at large. Ethical CSR is
more likely to be associated with first-party justice, which refers to individuals’ evaluation
of the fair treatment they themselves receive (Rupp et al., 2006). Since ethical CSR covers
organizations’ execution of its ethical code of conduct, employees would directly evaluate
the fairness of the organization based on the fair/unfair treatment they receive. In contrast,
legal and economic dimensions of CSR are more likely to be perceived as a given for a
company to exist (e.g. staying profitable and not to be punished by the law), therefore they
would not provide as salient cues for employees to evaluate the fairness of an organization.
These findings were somewhat different from Dhanesh’s (2012, 2014) findings where legal
and ethical CSR were found to have the greatest impact among employees in India. Such
difference may be explained by the different contexts in India and the USA. As a developed
economy, USA has been witnessing growing demand for CSR, especially discretionary and
ethical CSR in recent years (Cone Communications, 2016; O’Keefe, 2017). Emphasis on
CSR engagement has been mainly focusing on employees’ volunteer opportunities,
community engagement, charitable donations, as well as organizations’ ethical code
of conduct, which fall under the categories of discretionary and ethical CSR.
Such speculation, however, merits further empirical tests in cross-cultural settings.
The moderating role of perceived CSR-culture fit renders further insights on the differences
among the four CSR dimensions. As explained, higher perceived CSR-culture fit is more likely to
result in stakeholders’ intrinsic cognitive attribution of CSR to the organization, whereas lower
perceived CSR-culture fit would cause higher cognitive incongruence and more elaborated
process of CSR information, which in turn would lead to more extrinsic attribution of
organizations’ CSR motives (Du et al., 2010). Perceived CSR-culture fit does not moderate the
impact of discretionary CSR, but does moderate the effects from ethical, legal, and economic
CSR, especially for legal and economic CSR. This is probably because it is commonly known that
discretionary CSR is usually not directly related with an organization’s core business operations.
Therefore, the moderating effect of CSR-culture fit is not as salient as in other dimensions.
Moreover, it is possible that a company’s legal and economic CSR performance are more likely to
be perceived as self-serving as they are more closely related to business bottom line. When a
firm’s CSR and its culture does not fit, its effort in generating profit and obeying the law is more
likely to be at the expense of sacrificing the need of other stakeholders to satisfy the need of
shareholders. On the other hand, when employees do see a high fit between a firm’s CSR and
culture, their skepticism toward the company’s CSR performance is more likely to be reduced.

Theoretical and practical implications

Findings from this study provide important implications for corporate communications and
public relations research and practices. Theoretically, this study extends the body of knowledge
of CSR and internal relationship management in the fields of corporate communications and
public relations by examining the effects of CSR in overall as well as the discretionary, ethical,
legal and economic CSR dimensions on organization–employee relationships. It addresses the
gap in extant literature where CSR is mostly examined as a unidimensional construct.
More importantly, by incorporating employees’ perceived CSR-culture fit, this study also
addresses stakeholders’ CSR skepticism, one of the biggest challenges in CSR communications
(Du et al., 2010). By incorporating the construct of perceived fit that has been widely studied Organization-
upon consumer stakeholders into the context of internal corporate communications, this study employee
enriches the understanding of CSR as a strategy to build and cultivate relationships with relationships
employees. Finally, findings from this study also offer interdisciplinary insights, expanding the
scope and application of the organization justice theoretical framework into the fields of
corporate communications and public relations.
Practically, findings from this study provide implications for corporate 75
communications and public relations professionals on how to effectively nurture, build
and maintain relationships with employees through CSR. Organizations should not only
recognize the importance of CSR, but also develop more specific strategies that touch on
the different dimensions of CSR. Beyond the basic levels of staying profitable and obeying
the laws and regulations, organizations should establish and reinforce ethical business
conducts and ensure all stakeholders, including employees, are treated fairly.
Organizations should also implement discretionary CSR activities such as charitable
donations, volunteer opportunities and community engagement. Moreover, organizations
need to ensure that the corporate culture being cultivated is aligned with their CSR efforts.
Companies should incorporate their ethical CSR initiatives such as commitment to fair
treatment of employees and environmental friendly manufacturing procedures into the
corporate mission, vision, and values. Such mission, vision and values should be
effectively communicated to employees through various corporate communications
channels as well as the activities and initiatives that employees are able to contribute
ideas to and participate in. Otherwise, CSR efforts would result in employees’ skepticism.
Therefore, companies’ CSR efforts should be authentically ingrained into their corporate
culture, rather than merely addressed as a way to increase profits.

Limitations and future research directions

Despite its contributions, this study bares several limitations that should be addressed in
future research. First, participants recruited for this study work for companies that vary in
terms of industry type, size, organizational culture and dedicated CSR domains.
Such diversity in culture, business sectors, and organizational settings may have varied
impact on the models tested in this study. As such, the generalizability of the results should
be interpreted with caution. Future research could replicate the procedure in specific
organizational settings to further test the generalizability of the results.
Second, the current study used quantitative survey to answer the proposed hypotheses
and research questions. Since participants were asked to self-report their subjective
perceptions toward their employers, their response may be biased due to social desirability
and self-presentation (Schwarz, 1999). Furthermore, despite its capability to test the
relationships among variables, quantitative survey may not necessarily offer insights on the
“how” and “why” behind such pattern. Qualitative research methods such as in-depth
interviews, focus groups, and participant observation would help provide richer and more in-
depth understanding of the questions. Qualitative data would also help discover additional
factors that could not otherwise be tested in a survey with pre-identified variables.
For example, since CSR activities may not always be perceived positive facing skepticism
from stakeholders (Du et al., 2010), the plausible reasons of skepticism behind the moderation
effect found in this study could be further explored in qualitative interviews with employees.
Therefore, future studies could use multiple methods and qualitative approaches to
triangulate the findings and offer more in-depth understandings.
Third, findings from this study provides both converging and diverging patterns from
Dhanesh’s (2012, 2014) studies regarding the effects of different CSR dimensions on
employees’ attitudinal and relational outcomes. Such differences might be due to the
contextual differences between the USA and India. Future studies could use both
CCIJ quantitative and qualitative approaches to draw samples from different countries to
24,1 compare the similarities and differences of such effects, thus offering insights for corporate
communications at the international level.

References
Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A. and Ganapathi, J. (2007), “Putting the S back in corporate
76 social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 836-863.
Argenti, P. (2013), Corporate Communication, McGraw Hill, Boston, MA.
Arthur W. Page Society (2007), “The authentic enterprise”, available at: www.awpagesociety.com/
images/uploads/2007AuthenticEnterprise.pdf (accessed June 20, 2018).
Bigné-Alcañiz, E., Currás-Pérez, R., Ruiz-Mafé, C. and Sanz-Blas, S. (2012), “Cause-related marketing
influence on consumer responses: the moderating effect of cause-brand fit”, Journal of Marketing
Communications, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 265-283.
Bögel, P.M. (2015), “Processing of CSR communication: insights from the ELM”, Corporate
Communication: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 128-143.
Broom, G.M., Casey, S. and Ritchey, J. (2000), “Concepts and theory of organization-public
relationships”, in Ledingham, J.A. and Bruning, S.D. (Eds), Public Relations as Relationship
Management: A Relational Approach to the Study and Practice of Public Relations, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 3-22.
Brown, T.J. and Dacin, P.A. (1997), “The company and the product: corporate associations and
consumer product responses”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 1, pp. 68-84.
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T. and Gosling, S.D. (2011), “Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: a new source of
inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?”, Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 3-5.
Cable, D. and DeRue, D.S. (2002), “The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit
perception”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87 No. 5, pp. 875-884.
Carmeli, A., Gilat, G. and Waldman, D.A. (2007), “The role of perceived organizational performance in
organizational identification, adjustment and job performance”, Journal of Management Studies,
Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 972-992.
Carroll, A.B. (1991), “The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of
organizational stakeholders”, Business Horizons, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 39-48.
Chen, Z.F., Hong, C. and Li, C. (2017), “The joint effect of association-based corporate posting strategy
and eWOM comment valence on social media”, Internet Research, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 1039-1057.
Chong, M. (2009), “Employee participation in CSR and corporate identity: insights from a disaster-response
program in the Asia-Pacific”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 106-119.
Collier, J. and Esteban, R. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility and employee commitment”, Business
Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 19-33.
Cone Communications (2016), “2016 cone communications millennial employee engagement study”,
available at: www.conecomm.com/research-blog/2016-millennial-employee-engagement-study
(accessed October 20, 2018).
Coombs, T. and Holladay, S. (2012), Managing Corporate Social Responsibility: A Communication
Approach, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA.
Cropanzano, R., Byrne, Z.S., Bobocel, D.R. and Rupp, D.E. (2001), “Moral virtues, fairness heuristics,
social entities, and other denizens of organizational justice”, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 164-209.
Davis, K. and Blomstrom, R.L. (1975), Business and Society: Environment and Responsibility,
MacGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Dhanesh, G.S. (2012), “The view from within: internal publics and CSR”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 39-58.
Dhanesh, G.S. (2014), “CSR as organization-employee relationship management strategy: a case study Organization-
of socially responsible information technology companies in India”, Management employee
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 130-149.
relationships
Drucker, P.F. (1984), “The new meaning of corporate social responsibility”, California Management
Review, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 53-63.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2010), “Maximizing business returns to corporate social
responsibility (CSR): the role of CSR communication”, International Journal of Management 77
Reviews, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 8-19.
Freeman, R.E. (1984), Stakeholder Management: Framework and Philosophy, Cambridge University
Press, Manfield, MA.
Glavas, A. and Piderit, S.K. (2009), “How does doing good matter? Effects of corporate citizenship on
employees”, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Vol. 36, Winter, pp. 51-70, available at: www.jstor.
org/stable/pdf/jcorpciti.36.51.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Goodman, J.K., Cryder, C.E. and Cheema, A. (2013), “Data collection in a flat world: the strengths and
weaknesses of mechanical turk samples”, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 26 No. 3,
pp. 213-224.
Greenwood, M. (2007), “Stakeholder engagement: beyond the myth of corporate responsibility”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 74 No. 4, pp. 315-372.
Haley, E. (1996), “Exploring the construct of organization as source: consumers’ understandings of
organizational sponsorship of advocacy advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 19-36.
Hon, L.C. and Grunig, J.E. (1999), “Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations”, available at:
www.aco.nato.int/resources/9/Conference%202011/Guidelines_Measuring_Relationships[1].pdf
(accessed June 20, 2018).
Kelly, K.S. (2001), “Stewardship: the fifth step in the public relations process”, in Heath, R.L. (Ed.),
Handbook of Public Relations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 279-289.
Kim, J. and Rhee, Y. (2011), “Strategic thinking about employee communication behavior (ECB) in
public relations: testing the models of megaphoning and scouting effects in Korea”, Journal of
Public Relations Research, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 243-268.
Kim, S. (2011), “Transferring effects of CSR strategy on consumer responses: the synergistic model of
corporate communication strategy”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 218-241.
Ledingham, J.A. and Bruning, S.D. (2000), Public Relations as Relationship Management: A Relational
Approach to the Study and Practice of Public Relations, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Lee, E.M., Park, S.-Y. and Lee, H.J. (2013), “Employee perception of CSR activities: its antecedents and
consequences”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 10, pp. 1716-1724.
Li, Z. and Li, C. (2014), “Tweet or ‘re-tweet’? An experiment of message strategy and interactivity on
Twitter”, Internet Research, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 648-667.
Maignan, I. and Ferrell, O.C. (2000), “Measuring corporate citizenship in two countries: the case of the
United States and France”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 283-297.
Mason, W. and Suri, S. (2012), “Conducting behavioral on amazon’s mechanical turk”, Behavior
Research Methods, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
May, S. (2008), “Reconsidering strategic corporate social responsibility: public relations and ethical
engagement of employees in a global economy”, in Zerfass, A., Van Ruler, B. and Sriramesh, K.
(Eds), Public Relations Research: European and International Perspectives and Innovations,
VS Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 365-383.
Men, L.R. (2014), “Why leadership matters to internal communication: linking transformational
leadership, symmetrical communication, and employee outcomes”, Journal of Public Relations
Research, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 256-279.
Men, L.R. and Stacks, D.W. (2013), “Measuring the impact of organizational leadership style and
employee empowerment on perceived organizational reputation”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 171-192.
CCIJ Men, L.R. and Stacks, D.W. (2014), “The effects of authentic leadership on strategic internal
24,1 communication and employee-organization relationships”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 301-324.
Menon, S. and Kahn, B.E. (2003), “Corporate sponsorships of philanthropic activities: when do they
impact perception of sponsor brand?”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 316-327.
O’Keefe, L.N. (2017), “CSR grows in 2016 as companies embrace employees’ values”, Huffington Post,
December 16, available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/linda-novick-okeefe/csr-grows-in-2016-as-
78 comp_b_13657368.html (accessed March 8, 2018).
Rupp, D.E. (2011), “An employee-centered model of organizational justice and social responsibility”,
Organizational Psychology Review, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 72-94.
Rupp, D.E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R.V. and Williams, C.A. (2006), “Employee reactions to corporate
social responsibility: an organizational justice framework”, Journal of Organizational Behavior,
Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 537-543.
Schmeltz, L. (2012), “Consumer-oriented CSR communication: focusing on ability or morality?”,
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 29-49.
Schwarz, N. (1999), “Self-reports: how the questions shape the answers”, American Psychologist, Vol. 54
No. 2, pp. 93-105.
Seltzer, T., Gardner, E., Bichard, S. and Callison, C. (2012), “PR in the ER: managing organization-public
relationships in a hospital emergency department”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 128-136.
Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001), “Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer
reactions to corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 225-243.
Vlachos, P.A., Panagopoulos, N.G. and Rapp, A.A. (2013), “Feeling good by doing good: employee
CSR-induced attributions, job satisfaction, and the role of charismatic leadership”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 118 No. 3, pp. 577-588.
Waters, R.D. (2009), “Measuring stewardship in public relations: a test exploring impact on the
fundraising relationship”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 113-119.
Werther, W.B. Jr and Chandler, D. (2011), Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a
Global Environment, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Wheeler, D. and Sillanpää, M. (1997), The Stakeholder Corporation: A Blueprint for Maximizing
Stakeholder Value, Pitman, London.

About the authors

Dr Zifei Fay Chen (PhD, University of Miami) is Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication
Studies at the University of San Francisco. Her research focuses on corporate communication, social
media, corporate social responsibility, crisis communication and consumer psychology. Dr Zifei Fay Chen
is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: faychenzifei@gmail.com
Dr Cheng Hong (PhD, University of Miami) is Assistant Professor in Richard T. Robertson School
of Media and Culture at the Virginia Commonwealth University. Her research focuses on brand
activism, consumer boycott and buycott behaviors and corporate social responsibility.
Dr Aurora Occa (PhD, University of Miami) is Assistant Professor in the Department of
Communication at the University of Kentucky. Her research focuses on creating persuasive messages
and using multimedia technologies to help people prevent diseases, maintain their health, search for
treatments and understand science.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

Offshoring
Offshoring language-sensitive language-
services: a case study sensitive
services
Anne Kari Bjørge and Sunniva Whittaker
Department of Professional and Intercultural Communication,
NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway
79
Received 3 April 2018
Abstract Revised 13 September 2018
Accepted 13 September 2018
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on corporate communication issues that arise when a
company offshores language-sensitive services to a country which does not have a workforce with the
required language skills. It explores the consequences of adopting a total immersion policy and annual testing
regime to build and maintain linguistic competence among the workforce, with regard to motivation,
challenges and coping strategies.
Design/methodology/approach – The approach adopted was semi-structured interviews with
management and employee representatives, interviewed separately. The interviews were transcribed and
submitted to content analysis, supported by relevant company information.
Findings – The company’s language policy has generated a user environment where language proficiency is
developed in corporate interaction, and where the workforce is motivated by both intrinsic and extrinsic
factors. Strategic decisions relating to language policy need to take the workforce’s input into account to
discuss the testing regime with a view to test content and relevance.
Research limitations/implications – The findings relate to a limited material of 6 interviews with
14 interviewees in total.
Practical implications – The paper focusses on how to strike a balance between developing the skills
needed to perform job tasks and preparing for new more complex tasks without demotivating the workforce.
The conclusion sets out managerial implications.
Social implications – The paper contributes to understanding the dynamics of working in a multilingual
context.
Originality/value – To the authors’ knowledge the specificities of offshoring of language-sensitive services
with regard to motivation and coping strategies have not been explored previously. The fact that the services
in question have to be carried out in a minor language and that a total immersion strategy has been adopted
also represents something new.
Keywords Case studies, Motivation, Corporate communication management, Corporate language policy,
Language-sensitive services, Offshoring/Outsourcing
Paper type Case study

1. Introduction
In the twenty-first century, the status of a given language is not necessarily commensurate
with the economic wealth of the country/countries where it is spoken. The Nordic countries
are a case in point. According to data from the International Monetary Fund, these countries
are all among the 30 richest in the world in terms of purchasing power parity per capita
(Tasch, 2017). At the same time their national languages all fall into the category of minor
languages (Harzing and Pudelko, 2013, p. 89). However, for these countries whose wealth
stems from international trade, corporate communication across borders is sine qua non.
The implications of having an open economy and at the same time having a national
language that is spoken and understood by relatively few non-native speakers are legion
and have given rise to a fairly large body of research (cf. e.g. Piekkari et al., 2014).
Multinational corporations operate in a multilingual environment, and managerial decisions

Corporate Communications: An
The authors would like to acknowledge the funding received from The Research Council of Norway International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
(BIA programme). The project is part of Cross-Border Value Creation (FOCUS, NHH). The authors pp. 79-95
would like to thank the reviewers for their input, particularly for their suggestions concerning the © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
passage on managerial implications in the Conclusion. DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-04-2018-0040
CCIJ need to take linguistic diversity into account when drawing up their corporate language
24,1 policies (Fredriksson et al., 2006).
The present paper describes one specific aspect of this scenario that seems to have escaped
attention thus far, namely, issues that arise when organisations, in pursuit of cost-efficiency,
transfer activities requiring a good command of a minor language to another country where
the language in question is not spoken. The transfer of language-sensitive activities is, not
80 surprisingly, more prevalent in organisations from countries with widespread languages as
there will in general be a ready supply of trained labour. However, relocating activities that
require language skills is also considered to be a viable solution by organisations in the Nordic
countries due to their high salary and infrastructure costs. In the following a case study from a
Norwegian bank (hereafter referred to as BK) that has established a service centre in Latvia
will be presented. BK management has opted for a total immersion approach, i.e. requires that
its workforce speak Norwegian at all times in order to enhance their language skills. This
paper will explore how this strategy plays out in practice with emphasis on challenges, coping
strategies and impact on workforce motivation.

2. Theoretical considerations
Language has in recent years received a considerable amount of attention in international
business studies. Angouri and Piekkari (2018) drew attention to various contextual
categories that have emerged in extant research: manufacturing vs service firms;
executive suite vs white-collar and blue-collar workplaces; and private for-profit vs public
for-profit/non-profit organisations. Another dichotomy which to our knowledge has not
been explored hitherto is outsourcing vs offshoring (Metters and Verma, 2008) of language-
sensitive services. The main divide between these two scenarios with regard to language is
that in contrast to outsourcing, offshoring of the required language skills tends to be firm
specific, and the firm adopts a long-term perspective with regard to the acquisition and
maintenance of the skills in question. Offshoring of language-sensitive services is thus a
relevant category which can be explored from a variety of angles. Some of the issues are
similar to what we find in other multilingual corporate contexts where employees are
required to work in a second or third language (cf. e.g. Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005; Jenkins
et al., 2011; Piekkari et al., 2014; Bjørge and Whittaker, 2015), while other aspects are unique.
One such aspect is the fact that the language itself is a core element in the unit’s business
model. The point of setting up a unit abroad is to provide services that require linguistic
skills at a lower cost than would be the case in the home country, where the labour costs are
higher, but where no initial training is necessary. Language in this context is conceptualised
as an input that can be calculated in terms of cost/benefit. This particular aspect will not be
explored further in this paper. Indeed, our focus will be on the language users and language
practice rather than on language per se. This is in line with a general shift of focus in
international business research on language (Angouri and Piekkari, 2018).
BK’s total immersion policy embraces horizontal and vertical communication, both
inter- and intra-unit (Charles and Marschan-Piekkari, 2002). This entails Norwegian being
used in intra-unit contexts even when the local language would have served the purpose.
This applies both in horizontal and vertical interaction; exceptions only being made for
particularly sensitive HR interchanges which may take place in the local language. It should
also be added that English is a prerequisite for employment. Service centre interaction with
Norwegian customers is in Norwegian. Language classes focus on the specific language
requirements of relevant settings or target situations (Basturkmen and Elder, 2006), but also
cover social language and general vocabulary building. Previous research has revealed that
the individual employee develops coping strategies to deal with the language barrier
depending on the specific setting (Andersen and Rasmussen, 2004). The interface between
individual agency and company language policy at the micro level is thus central, as the
language situation poses challenges which employees are expected to handle in everyday Offshoring
interactions (Sanden and Lønsmann, 2018). language-
For the language user, acquiring and maintaining proficiency in Norwegian is linked to sensitive
career pathing, as linguistic skills determine whether employees are to remain in their jobs,
be promoted or singled out for further training (Piekkari et al., 2014, p. 129). In an offshoring services
context, then, language skills may trump other professional qualifications, which is not the
common way language ability is weighted (Piekkari et al., 2014, p. 120). Given the key role 81
played by language in the business unit, acquiring and maintaining a high level of
proficiency is defined as a key performance indicator not only for employees, but also for
managers at all levels in the organisation who are held accountable for the linguistic
performance of the employees working in their division. Delivering on these expectations is
thus a powerful motivating factor for BK’s workforce, as career prospects as well as status
in the Latvian community are linked to successful job performance. For the language user,
performing professionally in a language acquired as an adult requires a higher mental effort
than working in one’s own language. Identifying relevant challenges experienced and
coping strategies, i.e. reflecting on the psychological aspects of language acquisition and
language practice will also shed light on the specificities of the issue.
Our research is phenomenon driven and our aim is to report rich details about this linguistic
scenario (Von Krogh et al., 2012). As pointed out by Angouri and Piekkari (2018), institutional
and sociocultural aspects and the here and now of language practice are intertwined. It is our aim
to provide insights into the specificities of offshoring of language-sensitive services within all
three orders. As is the case for most phenomenon-driven research, we have adopted a pragmatic
approach to our research design. We will present a case study based on semi-structured
interviews which we have subjected to qualitative content analysis with a view to identifying
salient topics. Our aim is to determine to what extent language practice and language user
experiences in an offshoring context mirror or differ from that in other multilingual professional
settings described in extant literature.

3. Research context
Our case study was conducted in a Norwegian bank’s service centre in Riga, Latvia. The
bank opted for offshoring rather than outsourcing, as the tasks to be performed required
knowledge or skills that were specific to the organisation. The following factors impacted on
the choice of country: level of costs, regulatory framework (e.g. working environment
regulations and taxation), geographical and cultural proximity to the home country, and the
availability of a highly educated workforce with English-language proficiency. As the
services to be offshored were language sensitive, the fact that both Latvian and Norwegian
are Indo-European languages was an advantage, in addition to the possibility of
communicating in English, which may be described in terms of a “language path” (Piekkari
et al., 2014, pp. 15-22). However, Scandinavian language skills were in short supply on the
labour market, and the organisation has no other choice than to invest in the training of
employees. Thus, the potential for learning a new language was an asset in the recruitment
process (Piekkari et al., 2014, p. 114).
BK’s service centre in Riga was established in December 2012. BK’s recruits have their
linguistic backgrounds in Latvian or Russian language, and in most cases start their
employment with no previous knowledge of Norwegian. Language acquisition and
assessment are carried out with reference to the CEFR (2001), established by the Council of
Europe in 2001, which provides a framework for proficiency assessment. The framework
places users on a scale from A1/A2 (“basic”) via B1/B2 (“independent”) to C1/C2 (“proficient”),
and there are descriptors for each level that function as criteria for assessment. While the
descriptor for B2 refers to the ability to understand technical discussions in the user’s field of
specialisation, it also refers to the ability to produce “clear, detailed text on a wide range of
CCIJ subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue”. This means that users are expected to
24,1 develop a broad vocabulary range in addition to the terminological competence they need to
perform professionally. BK regards the B2 level as adequate for their purposes, and expects
recruits to pass this level after eight months, followed by annual tests.
The first Latvian cohort reached the CEFR (2001) A2 proficiency level in February 2013,
and started their professional training in Norway. A2-level speakers are classified as basic
82 users that “can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of
most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local
geography, employment). Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple
and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. Can describe in simple
terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of
immediate need”.
Full production in Latvia commenced in November 2013, and between 2014 and 2017 an
increasing number of tasks were transferred from Norway, including more complex tasks.
The offshoring context made management awareness of language a premium. This includes
being aware of potential issues due to the mandatory use of Norwegian; how to ensure that
new employees understand the implications of communicating professionally in a foreign
language; potential management issues – both for Norwegian and Latvian managers
interacting with the Latvian workforce; the implications of “pushing” employees to
communicate in Norwegian among themselves; and how to avoid misunderstandings in
inter-unit corporate communication between the Norwegian and Latvian units (Company
Presentation1, 2017).
Language classes are in company time, 4 h a day for six months. There is an initial trial
period of two months, and candidates failing to reach A1/A2 level at this point have their
employment terminated. At four months, recruits are allocated to a department, and
professional language content is gradually introduced in dedicated language classes. At six
months, employees reach the B1 level and can start working. The B2 level exam takes place
at eight months, and there is a 90 per cent pass rate. Employees are expected to maintain
their B2 level, either on their own initiative, or by attending courses, and are tested annually.
Failing to maintain the B2 level means employees can only communicate with Norway via
standard texts and not write their own texts (Norwegian “fritekst”), and there will be no
bonuses or company travel (Company Presentation2, 2017). B2 thus acts as a gateway to a
professional career in BK.
At the time of writing (2017), BK has approximately 300 employees in Latvia.
It should be mentioned that Latvian employment legislation requires that some central
company documentation is available both in Latvian and English, employment contracts
being a case in point. Other languages than Norwegian were also used in the recruitment
and initial phases.

4. Material/Method
4.1 Material
4.1.1 Interviews carried out on 12 December 2016, not recorded. The authors carried out
five interviews with management and employee representatives on the topic of the
corporate language policy and its implications. The interviews were semi-structured, and
referred to an interview guide that had been developed on the basis of previous research
on corporate language issues in multilingual organisations. The focus was on intra- and
inter-unit written and oral communication using Norwegian, and career pathing in a
multilingual setting (Piekkari et al., 2014). This was our initial meeting with the
organisation, and many of the questions related to practical aspects, e.g. why Norwegian
was used; whether all employees needed to speak the language; and which proficiency
level was required for employment.
 The information from these interviews was taken into account when developing the Offshoring
interview guide to be used in the next round of interviews. Questions about practical aspects language-
were not included, while others were added based on the interviewees’ experience with the sensitive
language policy, e.g. relating to their experience of communicating with Norwegians, and
the distinction between writing their own texts (Norwegian “fritekst”) vs standardised texts services
in inter-unit communication with Norway (Table I).
Both authors took part as interviewers, and are both referred to as Int in the transcription. 83
All the interviewees were non-native speakers of the interview language, but the
interviews were transcribed verbatim without content selection or editing to avoid loss of
information (Dörnyei, 2007, pp. 246-247). As our focus was on verbal content and not on
issues like intonation or interaction, a broad transcription approach was employed,
excluding pausing, suprasegmentals and backchanneling. Unclear passages were marked
as such in the transcription. Five of the interviews were in Norwegian, so passages from
these cited in the text represent the authors’ translations. The interviewees were informed
about the content of the interviews beforehand, and signed a consent form preceding the
interview. They were advised that participation was voluntary, and that they could
withdraw from the interview at any time.
The interviewees were selected by the Norwegian manager of the Latvian unit.

4.2 Method: qualitative content analysis

Understanding the context of the interviews is important in interview-based research to
avoid misrepresentations of the data (Bengtsson, 2016). The authors had gathered relevant
knowledge through an initial interview round (cf. 4.1), telephone contact with the Norwegian
manager, and company documentation, and were both present at all six interviews.
The semi-structured interview approach produced a rich text material as the interviewees
engaged with the topic, which was fundamental to their professional identity and
performance. Qualitative content analysis was chosen to produce a detailed and systematic
interpretation of the texts to identify salient themes (Berg and Lune, 2012). The coding
process consisted of a pre-coding and a coding stage (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 250f ).
4.2.1 Pre-coding stage. As described above, the interviews related to an interview guide,
which was based on previous research, and whose focus was the language situation in the
company. The texts themselves were produced in dialogue between interviewers and
interviewees, which means that the authors’ speeches and prompts are present in the
transcribed text, and guide the main direction of the interviews. These are, however, not
subject to analysis. While the central issues were addressed in all interviews, it is in the
nature of the semi-structured method of interviewing that the focus may vary between
the interviews, as interviewees may have more to contribute on some topics than others.

Participants/Gender
Interview/Date (male/female) Profession/Position Time

BK1/9 March 2017 3 (1M, 2F) Employees 52 min and 34 s

BK2/9 March 2017 2 (1M, 1F) Employees 66 min and 28 s
BK3/9 March 2017 3 (1M, 2F) Department managers 65 min and 1 s
BK4/10 March 2017 3 (1M, 2F) Employees 49 min and 36 s Table I.
BK5/10 March 2017 2 (2F) Service managers 75 min and 31 s Interviews carried
BK6/10 March 2017 1 (1F) HR manager (interviewed in English) 62 min and 45 s out on 9 and
Total 14 interviewees 6 h and 19 min 10 March 2017,
Notes: F, female; M, male recorded
CCIJ There is also the employee–management perspective to take into account, which we will
24,1 come back to in the analysis.
In the recorded interviews, the interviewers invited descriptions and opinions on the
linguistic setting in the organisation:
• Use of Norwegian in different professional and social settings.

84 • Private time spent on developing Norwegian proficiency.

• Use of English and Latvian/Russian as bridging languages.
• Communication with Norwegians.
• Norwegian as a career advantage.
4.2.2 Coding. The transcriptions were read through several times with a view to coding
(Dörnyei, 2007). The unit of analysis employed for the coding was the text produced by the
interviewee between the interviewer’s questions or prompts. One unit of analysis could
include more than one code. The process was a two-stage one: first, one of the authors
carried out an initial coding process identifying salient passages of text. This initial coding
process resulted in a list of “informative labels” indicating passages relevant to our topic
(Dörnyei, 2007, p. 251), for example:
And particularly when one is very tired, one has had a very demanding day, then one has a
tendency to go from Norwegian to Latvian (Manager, BK3).
The informative label for this passage was “Feeling tired”:
And some of those who have no problems using Norwegian every day are scared stiff at the
thought of handling a phonecall from Norway (Manager, BK5).
The informative label chosen for this passage was “Telephone interaction with Norwegians”.
The informative labels resulting from the initial coding were then submitted to a
second-level coding process, producing “broader labels” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 252f ). While the
coding of informative labels was an inductive and data-driven process, the establishing of
broader labels included an a priori aspect, as the interviews focussed on the BK language
situation, including views on situations that might be experienced as challenging. For the
two examples cited here, then, the label Challenges was regarded as appropriate.
Coding was an iterative process in which the number of broader labels was reduced,
moving towards a latent content analysis procedure with the aim of identifying the
underlying rather than the surface meaning of the text (Bengtsson, 2016). Thus,
interviewees referred to job opportunities outside BK in Latvia, which we subsumed under
the broader label “Professional aspects”. References to their attitude to Norway were
labelled “Relationship with Norwegian language/culture”. The deeper meaning behind
these two broader labels, however, could be analysed as motivational issues, and led to the
establishing of “Motivation” as a broader label. Also, the informative labels subsumed under
the label “Testing” were subsumed under the broader labels “Challenges”, “Strategies” and
also impacted on motivation (cf. Figure 1).
The clustering process of the informative labels resulted in the following three broader
labels, or codes:
(1) MOT: Motivation.
(2) CHALL: Challenges.
(3) STRAT: Coping strategies.
For the informative labels subsumed under the three codes, see the Appendix.
 Offshoring
language-
Relationship
sensitive
with Norwegian
language/culture
services
Professional
aspects

85

Testing

Figure 1.
Coding process
leading to
“Motivation”
Motivation

A final coding using these three labels was then carried out by one of the authors, and
relevant passages for illustration were selected. Next, these passages were read through by
both authors with a view to validation by discussing the application of the codes.

5. Interview results
The coding process identified three main topic areas, namely:
(1) Motivation (MOT), i.e. observations concerning the workforce’s motivation with
regard to learning and using Norwegian.
(2) Challenges (CHALL), i.e. challenges experienced by individuals and between co-workers,
as well as managerial challenges related to the use of Norwegian as a mandatory
language at work.
(3) Coping strategies (STRAT), i.e. the strategies developed to deal with the challenges
in question.
Employees and management were interviewed separately.
Below, we present the results of our interviews according to the three main topic areas,
indicating managerial or employee perspective where relevant.

5.1 Motivation (MOT)

BK is perceived as an attractive employer providing stability, an international perspective
and career development. BK is only one of several Scandinavian companies setting up units
in Latvia, making Norwegian a transferable skill well worth investing in. As the willingness
to learn Norwegian is a prerequisite for employment, it stands to reason that job seekers will
be externally motivated (Ryan and Deci, 2000). The mandatory use of Norwegian is
explicitly stated in BK’s job adverts and the potential for learning languages is taken into
account in the hiring process:
When I started four years ago I just wanted to work in an international environment. I did not
choose the job because of Norwegian language, it only came as a package. But It is now useful,
because more and more companies move to Latvia […]. And then I assume that if one applies for a
new job, it could be an advantage (Employee, BK2).
CCIJ I think that Norwegian gives us more value […]. In the labour market now you get more
24,1 opportunities if you speak Norwegian, or Swedish also. Because those companies that are in
Norway or that region, they want to come here (Employee, BK2).
And it is quite certain that they will not be without a job long with knowledge of Norwegian
(Manager, BK5).
Maintaining a high proficiency level also has a great impact on career prospects. Pay,
86 bonuses, job travel and tasks are all dependent on passing the annual B2 test:
It is a demand, if you are eligible for wage revision, you must have passed B2. And many other
things together with job travel, that are also linked to B2 (Manager, BK3).
However, in addition to the obvious external rewards, the interviews also revealed that
intrinsic motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2000) entered into the equation. Interviewees used
words such as interesting and exciting about learning a new language:
We understand that [learning Norwegian] is necessary for us, because perhaps since we work in a
bank, it is impossible for us to use only English […]. So it is very interesting (Employee, BK2).
The most exciting thing is that you learn a different language, you work in a different language and
really you manage to communicate both with those who live here in Latvia, but you also manage to
communicate rather well with Norwegians […]. That is exciting (Manager, BK3).
Acquiring knowledge about another culture and having access to a different type of
organisational culture were also reported as motivating factors:
I try to listen to radio every day, NRK, also to develop, and read media sometimes. And at NRK TV
there are many exciting TV shows. Some that suit me (Employee, BK1).
I think that there is also very much focus on Norwegian culture and environment during the study
period […] Equal opportunities and social life and everything. Healthy living, food, environment,
anything. Everything (Manager, BK5).
And I think that in international companies the leader is more accessible and communicate more
clearly […] Like here it is more free, for young people (Employee, BK2).
The ability to speak Norwegian gave employees a certain status outside the workplace:
Everyone is usually very interested when I relate that I use Norwegian at work, and then they ask
questions and almost admire how we have learnt it in such a short time (Employee, BK1).
However, using Norwegian when working for a Norwegian company was perceived as
logical by other Latvians:
None of them ever asked me why I am learning Norwegian […] It is expected that it is quite natural
to know the language. You are working with Norway, and you are connected with Norwegian
customers (Manager, BK6).
Management also reported on intrinsic motivation as an important factor:
And I think it helps a lot that we have young people. Because they want to show the rest of the
world “I can do it, I read Jo Nesbø in Norwegian” (Manager, BK3).
Interviewees reported that motivation decreased after the initial training programme as the
employees’ time was no longer devoted to learning the language but to performing tasks
that required a more limited work-related vocabulary:
Unfortunately, it is really the case that after having passed the B2, and start working full time, the
level drops, it does not rise. But everything that has to do with work, so I try to remind myself as
much as possible that Norwegian is the most important thing, really (Manager, BK3).
The annual B2 test, which was introduced in order to ensure that employees maintained a Offshoring
high proficiency level, seemed to have an adverse effect on motivation. The test was language-
perceived to include elements irrelevant for job purposes. Uncertainty surrounding exam sensitive
topics caused stress and frustration as it made preparation difficult:
services
And when we have this test, and when we meet these usual daily topics concerning food
and about daily life and healthy life and suchlike, then it becomes difficult, because you then have
to think very much to imagine what you want to say. For example in essay assignments 87
(Employee, BK4).
Because in fact that test shows nothing. It is about daily language that we do not in fact use at work
(Employee, BK4).
There were also some reservations regarding the relevance of the test among managers:
They deliver great volumes, without B2 (Manager, BK3).
So it is a bit amusing that when our customers assess us, but they say good work and good quality,
but when we have B2 test – no. Not so good (Manager, BK3).
As management was accountable for their subordinates maintaining the B2 level, having a
motivated workforce was also a matter of concern at this level:
My personal opinion is that people should quit BK if they do not have a good chance of getting a
pay rise […] Because in the market there are many companies looking for people who speak
Norwegian, and their Norwegian is good enough to find a different job (Manager, BK3).

5.2 Challenges (CHALL)

Norwegian was the third or even fourth language of the workforce. This multilingual
situation is not unproblematic and it is only to be expected that our interviewees
experienced linguistic challenges due to the mandatory use of Norwegian. Negatively
loaded formulations such as “difficult”, “challenging”, “demanding”, “almost impossible”,
“not standard”, “problem issue”, “misunderstanding” and “uncomfortable” were used.
General proficiency issues concerned both linguistic production (speaking and writing)
and reception (listening and reading). The former included lack of general and
professional vocabulary, grammatical issues, achieving preciseness, developing
proficiency and maintaining the B2 level. As for reception, interviewees found it
demanding to understand rapid spoken dialectal Norwegian and synonymous expressions
in inter-unit communication. All interviewees spoke Latvian or Russian at home.
Switching between languages on a daily basis could lead to transference of cognitive
patterns, vocabulary and syntax:
I also speak English, and Russian. But what I experience after having learned Norwegian, is that
Norwegian is taking over, and it has a very great influence on the other languages that are in my
head (Employee, BK2).
And particularly when one is very tired, one has had a very demanding day, then one has a
tendency to go from Norwegian to Latvian (Manager, BK3).
But I think in Norwegian. That is the situation when I talk to friends or my boyfriend, that suddenly
there is a word in the middle of the sentence that is Norwegian, such as “or”. The little words. And
then I must say obs, that was Norwegian (Employee, BK2).
The genre of professional telephone conversations was considered to be particularly
challenging. Understanding rapid and dialectal Norwegian was perceived as difficult, and
not being understood by Norwegian interlocutors due to having a Latvian accent was also
an issue. Task performance under these conditions was seen as stressful, and many wanted
CCIJ to avoid it altogether. Management was well aware of this, and worked to motivate more
24,1 employees to take on this challenge:
The most demanding for me is surely telephone contact with a person in Norway – If I meet dialect.
So it is just that I cannot see the person, and I cannot understand what he or she understands or not.
I just listen (Employee, BK4).
And some some of those who have no problems using Norwegian every day are scared stiff at the
88 thought of handling a phonecall from Norway (Manager, BK5).
Interviewees also reported that using Norwegian to perform specific job tasks was easier than
informal communication where the vocabulary required was much broader and unpredictable:
All assignments are in Norwegian […]. Professional issues are quite OK because we are used to
using those concepts. When it comes to leisure and things that happen outside work, it is more
challenging to find words (Employee, BK2).
I think we lack small talk in Norwegian. We need it. If […] we are in the lift, and maybe there are
also Norwegians who say “it is raining outside”, or some very small things, I do not know what to
respond (Employee, BK2).
In addition to the linguistic challenges related to proficiency, interviewees reported that the
cognitive load of having to use Norwegian throughout the working day was substantial.
Some reported feeling fatigued at the end of the working week, and that it took some time to
go back to Norwegian on Monday morning:
When Friday comes, I am again a little tired by using it for five days (Employee, BK2).
I think it affects how the person feels after work, if he has not been allowed to speak Latvian.
It probably does not feel so good (Manager, BK3).
In inter-unit communication, feeling at a disadvantage linguistically could lead to lack of
confidence concerning content:
But always the first thought in our head is that it is our fault. Because we are Latvians – how can
we know better than Norwegians […]. But often there is also a fault from the other side, and we
must just have a little more faith in ourselves and what we do (Employee, BK2).
From a managerial perspective, the use of Norwegian also creates specific challenges. The
managers we interviewed focussed on vertical interaction like leading and communicating
with a team having different proficiency levels; allocating tasks according to proficiency
level; and dealing with employees whose proficiency was inadequate for task performance:
It may be that learning a language is demanding, and then unfortunately we see that there are no
assignments we can offer with for example A1 or A2 level […]. And it is also quite demanding for a
leader to have a department where there are different levels among the employees […]. You do not
know whether that person has understood what you mean, and what you say (Manager, BK5).
Managers also commented on their own proficiency issues, but these related to higher
performance levels, such as defending a position in discussions, giving negative feedback,
answering complaints and dealing with other sensitive issues in inter-unit dialogue with
Norway. In these interactions they could not rely on standard procedures and formulations,
and had to develop their own solutions:
[…] [using Norwegian] makes work a little more demanding, you are surprised that you do not have
that broad vocabulary to relate everything you want and think, and as already said if there are
discussions and you must defend your argument, you often lack some words. So that is a challenge.
The same thing applies when you lead a team who have just learned Norwegian, or have learned
Norwegian two years ago, so they are all different levels […]. I never know if the message I say in
Norwegian reaches them (Manager, BK3).
The setting also made it harder to bridge the communicative gap with Norwegian colleagues Offshoring
living in a Norwegian setting; humour and politeness being cases in point: language-
Humour is difficult. You know that you wish to say something that could be funny, but it is not so sensitive
easy to do it. But when Norwegians come here and they tell us things, we understand, but it is a services
little difficult to respond in the same way (Employee, BK2).
Management shared the employees’ perception of this situation, but their professional
position and better opportunities for stays in Norway may have made this less pressing. 89

5.3 Coping strategies (STRAT)

Our interviewees had developed a broad range of coping strategies to deal with the
challenges presented above. As for language production and reception, general proficiency
issues were addressed through games and quizzes to build vocabulary; using English or
Latvian/Russian as support languages together with Google translate; focussing on getting
the message across rather than on grammatical correctness; developing terminology lists;
reformulating; explicitation; developing standardised answers and texts; and asking for
repetitions at reduced speed:
Sometimes on the board we write today’s new word […]. And sentences, which one has found something
interesting. And this has helped us to use Norwegian much more than before (Employee, BK1).
You adapt, you ask questions (Employee, BK2).
Explicitation was a common strategy when interacting with colleagues in Norway,
particularly when it came to politeness, and sensitive issues like disagreeing and
expressing criticism:
[On being told by a Norwegian colleague to start an email with “hi (Norw. “hei”)”:] “No, it is not polite
to do that, I do not know that person.” But it is so that one must learn to be a little different in
Norway than in Latvia (Employee, BK4).
Perhaps what you can write in two sentences, we sometimes describe in four or five (Employee, BK2).
I have noticed that […] instead of giving a brief explanation we write a very long text. What has
happenened? […]. What shall we do to avoid it in the future? And then we try to be kind, and excuse
us many times (Manager, BK3).
Inter-unit telephone conversations were dealt with by careful preparation; asking
interlocutors to slow down and repeat; and asking questions. In some cases, particularly
when dialectal pronunciation was an issue, e-mail was preferred. Management encouraged
or pushed employees to take on this necessary but daunting task:
We speak with our [Norwegian] colleagues in other departments, who also speak in dialect […]. They
also understand us, and they feel it in some way when we lose contact and understanding, and then
they start speaking more slowly, or they switch to perfect standard Norwegian (Employee, BK4).
But I think it is the same situation that we had at first to use language […] it took a lot of energy and it
was difficult. And it is the same with telephones […] The first time is demanding, difficult, you get
stresssed, but after a while the more phonecalls you take the simpler it gets for you (Manager, BK5).
Although the use of Norwegian was mandatory, there seemed to be some latitude in
communicative settings that were not task related. This gave employees a respite from the
mental effort of speaking a language that did not allow them to express all their thoughts
and feelings:
When we are in the kitchen or eat, then, when we speak Latvian, we can say more, and we can also
add some emotions (Employee, BK2).
CCIJ The time factor was seen as important when it came to coping with cognitive issues. The
24,1 workforce distinguished between two linguistic environments, the job one and the private
one. While some felt that they could switch on and off without any problems, others relied
on time to help bridge the gap between the two:
When I come to work on Monday it is a little more difficult to talk, but when it is at the end of the
week, then it is a little easier, because you get used to it during the week. So the two days when you
90 relax, then perhaps you forget a little and relax from Norwegian (Employee, BK2).
The language situation also led to employees remaining silent due to lack of vocabulary and
general proficiency, or even due to the fear of making mistakes. Some also questioned the
policy itself, claiming that they could perform according to their job specifications without
using Norwegian all the time:
I work well, I deliver high volume […] why then do I have to speak Norwegian all the time
(Manager, BK3).
As maintaining a high proficiency level in the workforce is a managerial responsibility,
management had also adopted a number of strategies. Thus, management took on the role
of defending BK’s language policy, setting a good example and encouraging employees in
developing their language skills:
It gives little value if you only know the professional register. That means that you know it today,
but next day your tasks change, and then what? It means that you do not know the language any
longer, and you have to start again (Manager, BK5).
So we must be role models […] show that one uses Norwegian everywhere all the way (Manager, BK5).
It is not just a question of pushing and referring to consequences […] it is also important to keep a
positive environment and be playful (Manager, BK5).
With regard to ensuring the quality of performance, checking understanding was done by
taking into account body language and asking questions:
You have to be very careful when you choose words, eye contact is very important to see if the
message is understood. So one has to be on guard all the time, really (Manager, BK3).
But when we have problems, then I have to double check that they understand. That we avoid
misunderstandings (Manager, BK5).
Managers shared best practices via an improvement log; they discussed nonstandard
correspondence with colleagues; and followed up e-mails by telephone or link. The really
awkward messages were passed on to higher management:
This man […] said that it was our mistake. There were some unkind words. And then we reacted
fairly strongly. Then we sent it up to a higher level, so those leaders sorted it out. It was his mistake
in any case. But he certainly did not use the best words (Manager, BK3).

6. Discussion
In the following, we will distinguish between factors that are inherent to offshoring of
language services per se and those that result from BK’s language policy, i.e. the total
immersion policy.

6.1 Factors that are inherent to offshoring of language services per se

In general, the motivation for offshoring services is financial, and this is also the case for BK,
who could have opted for hiring a Norwegian-speaking professionally qualified workforce
in Norway. As the services in question must be performed in Norwegian, language is a key
performance indicator and adequate proficiency a sine qua non for employment, which has Offshoring
implications for careers at BK. language-
Previous research has identified hypothetical scenarios for language-driven career paths sensitive
(Piekkari et al., 2014, p. 139). However, the offshoring context introduces an additional
scenario when it comes to linking language competency with career prospects, as the services
primary motivation for learning the language is to work locally, not internationally.
Norwegian being a minor language, its value as a job qualification mainly extends to 91
Scandinavia and to other offshored or outsourced operations in the region. At BK,
Norwegian proficiency trumps other professional qualifications (cf. Piekkari et al., 2014,
p. 120), but this would not necessarily be the case for a career move locally, where it may
merely represent an additional qualification.

6.2 Factors that result from BK’s language policy

The workforce interviewed at BK speak Norwegian as their third or even fourth language
(mother tongue, English, additional language and Norwegian). There is no previous research
focussing explicitly on how this multilingual situation impacts on performance in a corporate
setting, but research into second language acquisition (SLA) identifies some general issues
that are relevant to explore for the present context. One issue concerns the language learner vs
language user perspective in social or professional interaction. According to Firth and
Wagner (1997/2003, p. 175), SLA research has prioritised “the individual-as-‘nonnative
speaker’/‘learner’ over ‘the participant-as-language-‘user’ in social interaction’ ”.
From a “participant/user” perspective, we find that our interviewees have adequate
mastery of Norwegian to function professionally, and to reflect on their own professional
performance and linguistic usage. BK’s Latvian setup functions because its workforce deliver
professional services using a Norwegian that is adequate for the purposes in question, which
clearly defines them from a participant and user perspective. This is a situation that may
arguably be related to research into English as a lingua franca (ELF), which defines ELF
speakers not as deficient communicators, but as language users in their own right ( Jenkins
et al., 2011, p. 284). Similarly, one interviewee stated that in everyday interaction, getting the
message across was given priority over observance of strict grammatical rules. This approach
has also been in focus in Business English lingua franca research, where interlocutors may
decide to focus on “getting the job done” rather than “emulating native speaker discourse”
(Charles, 2008); i.e. prioritising communicative over grammatical competence.
Defining BK’s workforce as users in their own right is supported by their taking charge of
their own linguistic development. According to Firth and Wagner (1997/2003, p. 176)
“language – as a social and cultural phenomenon – is acquired and learned through social
interaction”. At BK, language development is through intra- and inter-unit interaction, both
with other Latvians and with Norwegians. As for the former, language games and daily
interaction are central. As for the latter, face-to-face contact with Norwegians is valued, but in
the case of leaner mediums like telephone interaction users are less confident, mainly due to
being at the receiving end of different dialectal pronunciations. Some also experienced
scepticism from Norwegian interlocutors due to having a Latvian accent, which may be linked
to the fact that people tend to put more trust in content communicated in their own native
accent. Contextual factors like wanting to plan and revise their language led some employees
to prefer using e-mail to the telephone, as they found it less stressful. While e-mail is defined as
a leaner medium than the telephone, it allows for careful formulations and revision in addition
to providing a record. In a banking context where a high level of precision is essential, this is a
priority. This picture was not universal, however, as some found telephone interaction with
Norway to be adequate for their purposes.
In line with taking charge of their own language development, BK’s workforce used
various coping strategies in Latvian–Norwegian oral interaction, such as repetition,
CCIJ explicitation and slower speech. These are communication accommodation strategies whose
24,1 aim is to promote mutual understanding, with interlocutors using a convergence strategy to
build rapport and promote understanding (Gallois et al., 2005).
On the other hand, the annual B2 test introduces a “learner” perspective. BK practises an
annual testing regime at B2 level. This is mandatory for workers who have already passed
the test as an entry requirement, and who may experience that their Norwegian is adequate
92 to manage their tasks. This had led to cases where employees who delivered according to
expectations but who failed the annual B2 test decided to leave, as failing the test would
affect their career path. Another “learner” feature concerns the issue of testing grammar,
which contrasts with the user perspective, where employees may find it expeditious to
prioritise communicative competence over grammatical correctness. A third issue concerns
the focus on learning general language content and vocabulary, which may also be linked to
the B2 test, but is not always perceived as useful. From a management perspective,
however, the annual B2 test may be seen as a necessary control mechanism to maintain
high-quality language production, and as a tool to ensure a linguistic mindset to take on
more complex assignments in the future. It does, however, introduce a test-driven element in
the workforce’s linguistic development.
So far, BK’s workforce has been discussed as a unit. However, non-native speaker groups
are not necessarily homogeneous (Firth and Wagner, 1997/2003, p. 182). When employees
and management were interviewed separately, they reported challenges specific to their
professional role. BK managers who had to take part in meetings with native speakers
found it challenging to hold their own in discussions, which is an issue familiar from
previous ELF research into professional discourse (Rogerson-Revell, 2008). In general, task
complexity and character impacted differently depending on job level. Here, a “learner”
aspect surfaced, with some wishing for courses at C1/C2 level (managers), or specific input
relating to professional vocabularies and telephone training (employees). However, as stated
above, the BK workforce discourse is a powerful driving force for language development.
It will be clear that BK’s workforce had chosen a career path involving the heavy
investment of learning a new language. The interviewees’ motivation reflected a combination
of intrinsic factors, in the sense of “doing something because it is inherently interesting or
enjoyable”, and extrinsic factors, in the sense of “doing something because it leads to a
separable outcome” (Ryan and Deci, 2000, p. 55). As for intrinsic motivation, some
interviewees reported a genuine desire for learning a new language as a reason for applying
for a job at BK. For others, the acquisition of the new language had generated an increasing
interest in Norwegian culture and language, including the pleasure of communicating with
Norwegian tourists in Riga. The positive feedback experienced in such interactions, the feeling
of mastery when using the language professionally, together with the status it gave in the
Latvian community all contributed to the feeling of competence and autonomy central to
intrinsic motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2000, p. 58). On the other hand, it will be clear that the
primary motivation among our interviewees was extrinsic, at least initially. Extrinsic factors
related to separable outcomes such as getting employment with an attractive international
employer and possessing a valuable transferable skill in the Baltic region. As for maintaining
the B2 level, the avoidance of sanctions was another separable outcome, as it failing the
annual test would lead to loss of privileges and bonuses.
In conclusion, it may be argued that Norwegian proficiency has become part of the
professional identity of BK’s workforce, in the sense of “how we perceive ourselves within
our occupational context and how we communicate this to others” (Neary, 2014, p. 14). This
competence is of central importance, both when performing job tasks and communicating
with the local environment. They may also be seen to represent an emerging multilingual
workforce in low-cost regions, whose professional identity is linked up to the provision of
language-sensitive services.
7. Conclusion Offshoring
Our study demonstrates that offshoring of language-sensitive services is a linguistic setting language-
that merits particular attention. This type of activity is an aspect of the internationalisation of sensitive
the European labour market which has led to an unprecedented status for minor languages
within specific geographical areas. Through the analysis of our interviews we have attempted services
to describe aspects of this activity that pertain to the institutional order, i.e. the overarching
choices made by the organisation such as the total immersion policy and the regular testing of 93
the workforce; the sociocultural order, i.e. collective strategies adopted by employees to
maintain their linguistic skills; and the employee experience of working in a language that is
used solely at work. Our study uncovers the underlying tensions between the perception of
employees as language users on the one hand and as language learners on the other hand.
The total immersion policy has generated a user environment at BK where language
proficiency is developed in corporate interaction, and where the workforce is motivated by
both intrinsic and extrinsic factors. However, the B2 annual test introduces a learner aspect,
where in some instances employees who experience that their proficiency is adequate for
professional performance live with the uncertainty of a pass/fail exam situation and its
consequences for their career paths. The fact that the exam content is more broadly based
than what is required for professional purposes is also a demotivating factor. This prompts
the question of how to strike a balance between developing the skills needed to perform
present job tasks and preparing for new more complex tasks which are likely to be required
in the future, without demotivating the workforce.
Our project has revealed some implications for managers working in multilingual
corporate contexts. When it comes to inter-unit telephone communication, we found a
preference for using written media like e-mail to the telephone. This was not only due to
comprehension issues involving dialectal pronunciation, but also because e-mail generated a
record for later reference. Another issue concerns corporate meeting contexts, where some
reported that they remained silent even if they felt they had a relevant contribution.
Knowledge transfer is also an issue, as different proficiency levels in teams may lead to loss
of information in vertical interaction. Finally, the annual language testing regime may lead
to resignations of otherwise well-functioning employees. Awareness of these issues, and of
any strategies that the workforce have developed to deal with these challenges are well
worth taking into account, and even address in training sessions.
In conclusion, we would like to point out that the present project is based on a limited
number of interviews. While this must be taken into consideration concerning
representativeness, it should be noted that there were no major contradictions in the
accounts, and that the material revealed results that were in keeping with findings from (B)
ELF and other research into multilingual work environments.

References
Andersen, H. and Rasmussen, E.S. (2004), “The role of language skills in corporate communication”,
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 231-242.
Angouri, J. and Piekkari, R. (2018), “Organising multilingually: setting an agenda for studying
language at work”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 12 Nos 1/2, pp. 8-27.
Basturkmen, H. and Elder, C. (2006), “The practice of LSP”, in Davies, A. and Elder, C. (Eds), The Handbook
of Applied Linguistics, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 672-694.
Bengtsson, M. (2016), “How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis”,
NursingPlus Open, Vol. 2, pp. 8-14.
Berg, B.L. and Lune, H. (2012), Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, 8th ed.,
Pearson, Boston, MA.
CCIJ Bjørge, A.K. and Whittaker, S. (2015), “Language management in a multinational workforce: the
24,1 knowledge worker perspective”, Hermes, Vol. 54, pp. 137-160.
CEFR (2001), Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, Cambridge University Press,
Strasbourg, available at: www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-
languages/?desktop=true (accessed 26 January 2018).
Charles, M. (2008), “English as a lingua franca in global business”, presentation at ELF Forum,
94 University of Helsinki, Helsinki, 8 March.
Charles, M. and Marschan-Piekkari, R. (2002), “Language training for enhanced horizontal
communication: a challenge for MNCs”, Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 65 No. 2,
pp. 9-29.
Company Presentation1 (2017), “Fure, S.B. ‘BK’ Service Centre Riga”, 30 March.
Company Presentation2 (2017), “Norskkurs/framtida”, Company-internal Presentation, Riga.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007), Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, OUP, Oxford.
Firth, A. and Wagner, J. (1997/2003), “On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts
in SLA research”, in Seidlhofer, B. (Ed.), Controversies in Applied Linguistics, OUP, Oxford,
pp. 173-198.
Fredriksson, R., Barner-Rasmussen, W. and Piekkari, R. (2006), “The multinational corporation as a
multilingual organization: the notion of a common corporate language”, Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 406-423.
Gallois, C., Ogay, T. and Giles, H. (2005), “Communication accommodation theory”, in Gudykunst, W.
(Ed.), Theorizing about Intercultural Communication, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA,
pp. 121-148.
Harzing, A.-W. and Pudelko, M. (2013), “Language competencies, policies and practices in
multinational corporations”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 48, pp. 87-97.
Jenkins, J., Cogo, A. and Dewey, M. (2011), “Review of developments in research into English as a lingua
franca”, Language Teaching, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 281-315.
Louhiala-Salminen, L., Charles, M. and Kankaanranta, A. (2005), “English as a lingua franca
in Nordic corporate mergers: two case companies”, English for Specific Purposes, Vol. 24,
pp. 401-421.
Metters, R. and Verma, R. (2008), “History of offshoring knowledge services”, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 26, pp. 141-147.
Neary, S. (2014), “Professional identity: what I call myself defines who I am”, Career Matters, Vol. 2
No. 3, pp. 14-15, available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10545/324124 (accessed 24 January 2018).
Piekkari, R., Welch, D. and Welch, L. (2014), Language in International Business, Edward Elgar,
Cheltenham.
Rogerson-Revell, P. (2008), “Participation and performance in international business meetings”, English
for Specific Purposes, Vol. 27, pp. 338-360.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new
directions”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 54-67.
Sanden, G.R. and Lønsmann, D. (2018), “Discretionary power on the front line: a bottom-up perspective
on corporate language management”, European Journal of International Management, Vol. 12
Nos 1/2, pp. 111-137.
Tasch, B. (2017), “The 30 richest countries in the world”, nordic.businessinsider, available at:
http://nordic.businessinsider.com/the-richest-countries-in-theQ12world-2017-3?r=UK&IR=T
(accessed 14 February 2018).
Von Krogh, G., Rossi-Lamastra, C. and Haefliger, S. (2012), “Phenomenon-based research in
management and organizations: when is it rigorous and does it matter?”, Long Range Planning,
Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 277-298, doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2012.05.001.
Appendix. Codes and informative labels Offshoring
language-
Motivation (MOT)
sensitive
• Career prospects services
• Status
• Cultural differences Norway – Latvia 95
• Interaction with Norway/Norwegians
• Task allocation according to proficiency
• Implications of the B2 test

Challenges (CHALL)
• Proficiency issues (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, pronunciation)
• Social language; humour and small talk
− Telephone interaction with Norwegians
• Lack of Norwegian native speaker input
• Politeness issues
• Remaining silent due to lack of context-appropriate Norwegian
• Different linguistic levels among the workforce
• Writing “fritekst”
• Interacting with awkward Norwegian customers
• Misunderstandings
• Feeling tired

Coping strategies (STRAT)

• Language games with colleagues (local)
• Developing standard texts together with colleagues (local)
• Use of English/Latvian/Russian/Google translate as support
• Asking questions; asking for repetitions at slower speed; double-checking
• Focussing on getting message/content across rather than “correctness”
• Mutual linguistic adaptation with interlocutor
• Explicitation
• Observing body language, checking for understanding
• Using e-mail to follow up oral interaction

Corresponding author
Anne Kari Bjørge can be contacted at: anne.bjorge@nhh.no

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

CCIJ
24,1 Winning in the court of
public opinion
Exploring public relations–legal collaboration
96 during organizational crisis
Received 21 November 2017
Soojin Kim
Revised 14 August 2018 School of Communication, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,
Accepted 11 October 2018
University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Arunima Krishna
Department of Mass Communication, Advertising, and Public Relations,
Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, and
Kenneth D. Plowman
School of Communications, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore how public relations (PR) professionals develop co-
narratives with legal counsel when formulating crisis communication strategies. Understanding how PR
practitioners work with their legal counterparts may help lead to more advanced and effective PR practice in
the area of crisis communication and management. The authors attempt to do so in this study through
interviews conducted with PR practitioners in two Asian countries – South Korea and Singapore.
Design/methodology/approach – In total, 11 semi-structured interviews with PR consultants, 6 in Korea
and 5 in Singapore were conducted between May and August 2016. Data analyses revealed key points of
interest for PR practice.
Findings – First, PR consultants in both countries reported increased collaboration with legal counsel in
times of crisis. Second, PR consultants report that legal professionals have begun to realize the significance of
winning in the court of public opinion. However, the process by which PR–legal collaboration takes place to
develop co-narratives followed extremely different patterns in the two countries.
Research limitations/implications – This exploratory study is not exempt from limitations. The findings
from this study may not be applicable to other countries. As data collection in both countries relied on snowball
sampling techniques, the participants in the interviews may not be representative of PR consultants in South
Korea and Singapore. E-mail interviews had limitations due to their lack of richness and details compared to
other forms of interviews (i.e. face-to-face or Skype interviews). However, computer-mediated interviews
including e-mail interviews can still create good level of understandings about the phenomenon in question.
Originality/value – This study was an attempt to understand PR–legal collaboration particularly in times of
crisis and contribute to the development of Asia-centric models of PR practice. There has been little research
that explores how legal and PR counsels actually collaborate to devise optional crisis communication strategies
for their clients (or organizations) in the times of crisis. Given that crisis communicative strategies have been
shown to affect publics’ perceptions of an organization’s credibility and trustworthiness, it is important to
understand how PR work with legal practitioners to develop co-narratives for optimal crisis management, and
understand how their different professional perspectives, practices, and approaches affect the collaboration.
Keywords Crisis communication, Conflict resolution, Co-narratives, Legal strategy, Public relations strategy
Paper type Research paper

In times of organizational crises, public relations (hereafter PR) managers face the dilemma
of seemingly competing crisis management objectives – protecting organizational
reputation, or reducing legal liability (Hoger and Swem, 2000). Although scholars have
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal warned that the dominance of legal motives may be short-sighted and costly, organizations
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 96-114
tend to place more weight on legal strategy than on PR strategy (Fitzpatrick and Rubin,
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
1995; McCann, 1994). Moreover, strained relationships between PR and legal counsel,
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-11-2017-0108 stemming from inherent tensions (Cooper, 1992), and a lack of understanding of the other
side’s practice and approaches (Reber et al., 2001) hinders effective crisis management Winning in
(Fitzpatrick, 1996; Reber et al., 2001). However, effective collaboration between PR and legal the court of
is an essential element for crisis management (Fitzpatrick, 1996; Lee et al., 1999). PR public opinion
professionals should, therefore, find ways of facilitating smooth and efficient PR–legal
collaboration for crisis management strategy development.
Yet, there has been relatively little research that explores how legal and PR counsels
actually collaborate to devise optimal crisis communication strategies for their clients (or 97
organizations) in times of crisis. Huang and Su (2009) identified the determinants of crisis
communication strategies as being PR autonomy, legal dominance, strategic orientation,
and organizational factors. Although their study discussed the dilemma of balancing legal
and communication strategies faced by PR practitioners, how PR practitioners actually
resolve these dilemma is a question that needs to be addressed. Furthermore, although
previous research such as Reber et al.’s (2001) study on co-orientation between PR
practitioners and lawyers has improved our understanding of their working relationships
and view each other, how PR consultants reconcile (possibly) contradictory positions with
those of lawyers’ when devising crisis communication strategies for their client is a question
that remains unanswered.
Thus, this study explores the process by which PR professionals develop co-narratives
with their legal counterparts when formulating crisis communication strategies.
Co-narratives are communication messages that both legal and PR counsels can agree
upon as being optimal in addressing the crisis as well as aligning with the mission and goals
of an organization. It is becoming more complicated and challenging than before for PR
managers to create effective crisis communication messages that satisfy both publics and
their organization. The recent United Airlines re-accomodation case where CEO Oscar Munoz
had to issue an apology twice (Mutzabaugh, 2017) demonstrates how significant it is for
organizations to devise their communications messages carefully. It is important for counsel
to create crisis communication messages that allow organizations to take care of financial and
legal liabilities as well as liability for organizational reputation and public trust.
However, winning battles in the legal courts does not always guarantee that
organizational reputation will escape unscathed; instead, the “court of public opinion is often
much harsher than the court of law” (McCann, 1994, p. 43). It is, therefore, important to
understand how PR professionals may effectively collaborate with their legal counterparts
to win not only in the legal courts but also in the court of public opinion. PR practitioners
and lawyers do not always agree on what to say (Lee et al., 1999). Understanding how PR
practitioners work with their legal counterparts may help lead to more advanced and
effective PR practice in the area of crisis communication and management.
We attempt to do so in this study through interviews conducted with PR practitioners in
two Asian countries – Singapore and South Korea. Our study is a departure from Reber
et al.’s (2001) work that investigated both PR and legal professionals. Instead, we seek to
compare how PR practitioners in two Asian countries perceive the PR–legal collaboration
and how they manage to devise an optimal crisis response strategy despite tensions,
dissimilarities, or challenges that come from collaborating with lawyers. In an attempt to
answer Halff and Gregory’s (2014) call for more Asia Pacific-oriented models of PR, through
this study we aim to bring Asian perspectives into explorations of PR–legal collaboration
dynamics. Participants from two Asian countries – Singapore and South Korea – were
selected for data collection, as these nations are considered to be in different phases of
development in terms of how their respective PR industries have progressed. According to
the Edelman (2016) Trust Barometer, Singaporeans report a high level of trust in
institutions including government, while South Korea still suffers from levels of distrust.
Although the media are the least trusted institutions for Singaporeans, their trust in media
and journalism is still higher than South Korea. Furthermore, South Koreans’ level of trust
CCIJ in business continues to slide, while Singapore’s remains steady. Many multinational PR
24,1 firms, such as Edelman and Fleishman-Hillard, have operations in both countries.
Interestingly, four Korean PR companies are part of global top 250 PR agencies while no
Singapore companies were included in the list (Holmes Report, 2018). All these elements
create unique PR environments for study in the two countries. Comparing the collaboration
and practices reported by PR professionals from the two nations may provide further
98 insight into the fragmented nature of PR practice in Asia, and further answer Halff and
Gregory’s (2014) call to investigate Asia Pacific PR practice. The next section provides a
review of the literature in which this study is situated, especially interprofessional
collaboration and PR.

Literature review
Interprofessional collaboration
Although several definitions exist, collaboration is usually defined based on the underlying
concepts of sharing, partnership, power, interdependency and process (D’Amour et al., 2005).
According to D’Amour et al.’s (2005) literature review on definitions, collaboration means
sharing responsibilities (Henneman et al., 1995; Henneman, 1995; Liedtka and Whitten, 1998)
and shared decision making (Liedtka and Whitten, 1998). It requires (c) partnership, which
implies two or more parties’ collaborative undertaking (Sullivan, 1998) and pursuit of
common goals (Stichler, 1995). Collaboration also requires that involved parties be
interdependent (Evans, 1994) and power be shared among participants (Sullivan, 1998). It is
a dynamic and evolving process (Hanson et al., 2000) which follows negotiation and
compromise in decision making (Liedtka and Whitten, 1998). Compromise is considered as a
part of the newer model of symmetry proposed by Plowman (1996) for PR that also included
accommodation and might be well considered in this study along with the concept of power.
Collaboration is considered a win/win in the negotiation literature where both sides adapt to
each other, and compromise is more of a 50/50 or split the difference proposition.
Accommodation is closer to a lose/win concept where one side is willing to lose more than
the other side to reach an agreement (Brooks et al., 2018).
Interprofessional collaboration, specifically, is an idea that emerged out of increasingly
complex medical and healthcare practice, which necessitates collaboration between
practitioners from multiple (health-related) disciples and specialties (Bridges et al., 2011).
The Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative defined interprofessional collaboration
in the context of healthcare as “the process of developing and maintaining effective
interprofessional working relationships with learners, practitioners, patients/clients/families
and communities to enable optimal health outcomes” (Canadian Interprofessional Health
Collaborative, 2010, p. 8).
Of note is Gray’s (1985) listing of several conditions under which collaboration among
stakeholders is guaranteed: problems cannot be solved by a single organization, limitations
of traditional adversarial methods of problem solving, and increasing environmental
turbulence. Dealing with organizational crises satisfies these conditions, especially in case of
organizational transgression (Coombs, 1995), particularly as the business, political,
regulatory, and social environments continue to become increasingly complex and
intertwined. For organizations to cope with these dynamic and complex environments,
interprofessional collaboration between practitioners (in-house or consultants) is not just
preferable, it is necessary.
Interprofessional collaboration takes different forms of interaction, engendering tensions
as well as opportunities. The complexities and problems associated with interprofessional
relations have been acknowledged by several scholars (e.g. D’Amour et al., 2005). Freeth
(2001) identified several issues in interprofessional collaboration, including allocation of
limited resources, ability and willingness to share power with the counterpart, congruence
of objectives between parties, resistance to change, and communication. Cottrell and Winning in
Sheldon (1963) classified problems in professional collaboration as: cultural or subcultural the court of
barriers to communication and collaboration, social status and structure that are associated public opinion
with each occupation, and role ambiguity and incongruent expectations. Concerns about
potential loss of identity (Beattie, 1995; Biggs, 1997) and inherent tensions between parties
(Grant, 1986) are also worthy of attention.
In this study, we examine PR–legal collaboration for crisis management as a specific 99
type of interprofessional collaboration, investigating whether the problems and
complexities of interprofessional collaboration identified in extant literature may also
appear in PR–legal collaboration, particularly as perceived by one party generally
considered to be less powerful in the dyadic relationship. Differentiating from Reber et al.’s
(2001) study, which involved interviews with both lawyers and PR practitioners to
understand their co-orientation, we focus our attention on the perspectives of PR
consultants across two nations.

PR–legal collaboration for crisis management

In dealing with organizational crises, PR–legal collaboration is a necessary collaborative
problem solving process. Resolving an organizational crisis is a daunting task, and often
requires immediate and intensive involvement of both PR and legal practitioners. While
there is a growing need to encourage effective PR–legal collaboration, there is a dearth of
research that investigates how such collaboration happens and works for crisis
management (Hoger and Swem, 2000), particularly from the PR consultants’ perspective.
The PR–legal relationship has been generally known to be adversarial (Reber et al., 2001),
like mixing oil and water (Simon, 1969), albeit with a few exceptions (e.g. Lee et al., 1999;
Martinelli and Briggs, 1998), and often results in turf battles (Fitzpatrick, 1996; Huang and
Su, 2009). PR literature defines this relationship as contention or competition, a win/lose
scenario where one side wins and the other side loses (Brooks et al., 2018). There is a need,
then, to emphasize the collaborative or win/win relationship between PR practitioners and
legal counsel (e.g. Lee et al., 1999). As part of collaboration, other aspects should be
considered, like compromise, a 50/50 splitting the difference in an agreement as well as
accommodation, a lose/win scenario where one side loses what it does not consider essential
to allow the other side to win in a dispute (Plowman, 1998). Fitzpatrick and Rubin (1995)
suggested that more collaborative approaches be taken by both PR practitioners and
lawyers. Considering that frequent professional interactions between PR practitioners and
legal counsel have been reported to positively benefit their working relationship, and that
crises are best handled by PR practitioners who already have built relationships with
lawyers prior to the crisis (Fitzpatrick, 1996; Lee et al., 1999), it is important for scholarship
to focus on understanding what PR consultants can do to ensure mutually beneficial
relationships and effective collaboration with legal counsel.
Fitzpatrick and Rubin (1995) found that when it comes to crisis response strategy, legal
considerations tend to dominate organizational decision making over PR considerations. As
many organizations prioritize avoiding legal repercussions when managing crises, “no
comment” or silence tends to be the most preferred communication strategy (Fitzpatrick and
Rubin, 1995). However, to emerge from a crisis unscathed, it is becoming more and more
important for organizations not just to avoid the arms of the law, but also protect
organizational reputation by winning in the court of public opinion (McCann, 1994; Schneier,
2013). This is where the role of communication strategy comes in, as how and what to
communicate to publics affect the formation of public opinion. Public opinion can be very
powerful as “this court of public opinion is based on reputation, revenge, public shaming,
and the whims of the crowd. Having a good story is more important than having the law on
your side.” (Schneier, 2013, paragraph 6, italics emphasis added). This necessitates a close
CCIJ and efficient collaboration between crisis professionals to ensure that selected crisis
24,1 communication messages that are both public- and media-friendly are devised. Given that
crisis communicative strategies have been shown to affect publics’ perceptions of an
organization’s credibility and trustworthiness (Huang and Su, 2009), it is important to
understand how PR professionals work with lawyers to develop co-narratives for optimal
crisis management, and understand how their different professional perspectives, practices,
100 and approaches (Cooper, 1992; Hoger and Swem, 2000; Lee et al., 1999) affect the
collaboration. Accordingly, the following research questions guide this exploratory,
qualitative study:
RQ1. How do PR practitioners develop co-narratives in collaboration with lawyers?
RQ2. What differences and commonalities do PR practitioners identify from their
collaboration with lawyers?
RQ3. How do PR practitioners ensure effective collaboration with lawyers?

Method
Selection of countries: Singapore and South Korea
Singapore. The PR industry in Singapore has grown rapidly since the early 1950s when
multinational corporations resumed their businesses after the Second World War (Institute
of Public Relations of Singapore, n.d) and there was a “marked increase in the number of
MNCs entering Singapore […] As one of Asia’s leading financial, media, and industrial hubs,
Singapore’s public relations industry burgeoned in tandem with a competitive economy”
(Lim et al., 2005, p. 319). Singapore’s Government was the main agent that influenced the
formation and growth of its PR industry (Curtin and Gaither, 2012). Although PR in
Singapore is not typically used as a strategic management function (Lim et al., 2005), Tan
(2001) concluded that PR agencies’ practices in Singapore were more strategic and advanced
than corporations, where PR managers perform technician roles.
South Korea. South Korea’s PR industry has also evolved dynamically with the entry of
multinational corporations, and South Korean companies’ pursuit of foreign markets
(Key, 2014; Rhee, 2002). Similar to other Asian countries, the growth of the PR industry in
South Korea has too been driven by its government (Halff and Gregory, 2014). Key (2014)
found that although South Korean companies such as Samsung and LG have advanced the
approach of public engagement like other developed countries, there is still room for
improvement, particularly when PR is still seen as a means to controlling the story in the
media. As Key (2014) pointed out, “with the opening of borders, the country also became
vulnerable to international standards and learned the hard way that South Korea needed to
shape up practices and regulations in order to take a place at the global level” (paragraph
14). One key area that will affect the growth of South Korea’s PR industry in the future is
crisis management (Benjamin, 2016, March 23).

Sampling
As the market for PR–legal collaboration is still in its infancy, it was difficult to identify
participants who have experienced such collaboration. Therefore, one of researchers in this
study combined two sampling methods: purposive and snowball sampling. Given the
exploratory nature of this study, such sampling techniques were considered appropriate.
A purposive sample is a “non-probability sample that is selected based on the
characteristics of a population and the objective of the study” (Crossman, 2017,
paragraph 1). This sampling approach is often known as selective sampling, but it can be
very useful when sampling for proportionality is not a concern for the purpose of the study
(Crossman, 2017). It allows the researchers to reach the targeted sample efficiently Winning in
(Crossman, 2017). Principles of homogeneous purposive sampling and expert purposive the court of
sampling were adopted in this study as the researchers sought to find one shared public opinion
characteristic among PR consultants, i.e., several instances of collaborating with legal
counsel/lawyers for organizational crises. Additionally, expert purposive sampling was
required in this study, which aims to gain knowledge and information about a specific
expertise (i.e. PR–legal collaboration). 101
There are five possible combinations of using internal and external sources for dealing
with an organizational crisis. To explain, one team could consist of an internal PR manager
and an internal lawyer. A second team could consist of an internal PR manager and an
external lawyer. A third combination of an external PR consultant and an internal lawyer
too is possible. Fourth, a company might retain both an external PR consultant and an
external legal team. And finally, a company’s internal PR manager may team up with
external crisis communication consultants and lawyers and coordinate the process of crisis
management. Although exploring these five combinations is worthy of investigation, in this
study, we chose to investigate interprofessional collaboration by external PR experts given
a common mission (with the legal team) from a client. Combining internal resource (i.e. either
internal PR manager or internal lawyer) and external resource (i.e. either external PR
consultant or external lawyer) involves new dynamics and contexts, i.e., a client–agency
relationship. This context is different from looking into the perspectives of external experts,
whose views may be different from their clients’ views.
Both PR consultants and lawyers from law firms are called in to resolve an
organizational crisis as third parties. Furthermore, internal lawyers or internal PR managers
may not be experts in dealing with an organizational crisis and reputational threat even
with knowledge of the internal situation. Finally, we delimit the scope of our study to the
perspectives of PR consultants, rather than comparing both PR consultants and lawyers.
To differentiate from previous research, such as Reber et al.’s (2001) study, which involved
interviews with both lawyers and PR practitioners to understand their co-orientation, we
focus our attention to PR consultants’ perspective across two different countries, instead of
replicating Reber et al.’s (2001) study in other two countries. Our intent is to build on
previous research by exploring different cultural contexts.
Therefore, referring to information regarding PR agencies such as the Global top 250 PR
agency ranking (Holmes Report, 2016), Top 10 PR Agencies in Singapore (Focus Singapore,
2017), and the Korean PR Consultancy Association (KPRCA, n.d.), one of authors contacted
PR firms in the two countries and approached her professional network of PR firms in each
country and asked them to recommend other consultants who may be interested in
participating in this study (see Table I for background information of the participants).

Data collection
In total, 11 semi-structured in-depth interviews with PR consultants, 6 in South Korea
between October to November 2015 and 5 in Singapore between May to August 2016 were
conducted. In-depth interviews are usually used to “obtain the point of view of the
respondent on a topic, phenomenon or subject under study and seek as much detail as
possible about the research subjects’ views on the topic via their opinions expressed”
(Weerakkody, 2009, p. 178). The interview protocol was created based on literature
pertaining to the dynamics of PR–legal collaboration for resolving organizational
crisis (Fitzpatrick and Rubin, 1995; Fitzpatrick, 1996; Huang and Su, 2009; Lee et al., 1999;
Reber et al., 2001).
Participants were asked to share their experiences and opinions regarding the following
topics: their description of PR–legal collaboration; identification of motives between PR and
legal counsels; their definition of relationship between PR and legal counsels; process of
CCIJ Work experience in public
24,1 Participant Title relations industry (year) Expertise

Singapore
1 Account director 20 years Corporate communication, crisis
communication
2 Managing director 30 years Crisis communication, corporate
102 sustainability
3 Partner and head 16 years Finance, reputation management, crisis
communication
4 Regional managing 20 years Corporate reputation management,
director corporate thought leadership and
positioning
5 Executive director, 20 years Public affairs and strategic
Asia Pacific communications
South Korea
1 Executive coach and 20 years Communication consulting, leadership
facilitator training, issue management
2 Managing director 20 years Strategic communications
3 Chief partner 20 years Crisis communication
4 Managing director 20 years Issue and crisis management, public
Table I. affairs, marketing
Background 5 Managing director 25 years Public affairs, risk management,
information of the reputation management
participants 6 Managing director 22 years Public affairs and conflict management

co-narrative development; challenges and obstacles in finding the optional communication

strategy; and the ideal process for PR–legal collaboration to identify the optimal strategy.
Although the interviews followed the interview protocol in general, interviewees were free to
speak about other topics they felt relevant during the interview.
Today, in-depth interviews can be conducted in various forms, such as face-to-face,
phone, or e-mail, to allow for the inclusion of global subjects and informants (Weerakkody,
2009). All interviews in Singapore were conducted via face-to-face meetings, while the ones
in South Korea were conducted via one of three methods: face-to-face meetings (two), Skype
video interviews (one), and e-mails (three). South Korean participants could choose the type
of interview that best fit their schedules and situations. The face-to-face and Skype video
interviews went for approximately two hours each. In the case of e-mail interviews,
follow-up e-mail interviews were used when necessary for clarification.

Data analysis
All interviews that used face-to-face meetings and Skype video calls in Singapore and
South Korea were audio-recorded upon the permission of participants. E-mail interviews
were saved as text-form data. Interviews in Singapore were conducted and recorded in
English. Audio-recorded files were transcribed. Transcripts of South Korean interviews
were translated into English by professional translators, and one of authors of this study, a
native speaker of Korean, rechecked the quality of the Korean–English translation.
Quotations have been revised for clarity.
The interviews resulted in 135 pages of data, which were then analyzed using a thematic
analysis to identify salient patterns from interviews in two countries (Braun and Clarke,
2006). Themes pertaining to the research questions were specifically focused on in this
process. First, the first author read through the data to identify emergent themes pertaining
to the research questions. The data were read and re-read and initial codes were identified.
Then, the second author read through the data to further confirm and refine the themes Winning in
using the constant comparative method. The first two authors then discussed the themes, the court of
reviewed them for resonance, and modified direct quotations for clarity while ensuring that public opinion
the meaning as conveyed by the participants remained intact.

Findings
The analyses of the data revealed key points of interest for PR practice. First, PR 103
consultants in both countries reported increased collaboration with legal counsel in times of
crises, despite several issues for effective collaboration (RQ3). Second, PR consultants report
that legal professionals have begun to realize the significance of winning in the court of
public opinion. However, the process by which PR–legal collaboration takes place to develop
co-narratives (RQ1) followed extremely different patterns in the two countries (RQ2). The
sections that follow are organized around seven major themes to answer our research
questions: increased collaboration; from courts’ opinion to public opinion; differences
between motives of legal and PR practice; finding common ground; developing and
finalizing co-narratives; power relations; and tactics to ensure effective collaboration. Due to
the emergent and intersecting nature of the findings, this section is organized thematically
rather than by research question.

Increased collaboration
PR consultants who were interviewed in both Singapore and South Korea mentioned that
they had noticed a change in the PR industry: increased collaboration between lawyers
and PR consultants in the area of crisis management consulting. Respondents noted that
the increasing demand for PR–legal collaboration may be attributed to the recognition of
the importance of public opinion in crisis management by organizations as well as by
society at large.
One crisis communication consultant in Singapore said, “We find that the most two
important people whenever a crisis happens is the corporate communication person and the
legal team” (SG Participant No. 1). Another communication consultant who specializes in
public affairs also discussed how he had been invited many times to work together with
legal counsel during crises. He summarized his perspective on the collaboration as “So our
job really is, to really become strategic in terms of how do you communicate the legal
position?” (SG Participant No. 5). For this participant, collaborating with the legal counsel to
work out the best communication strategies to communicate the organization’s legal
position was crucial for effective crisis management.
South Korean participants discussed an incident that they considered to be pivotal in
changing the PR industry: Korean Air’s peanut U-turn crisis. One participant noted,
“As seen in the Korean Air case – companies actually have started to recognize that the
legal approach isn’t everything, and to realize the importance of reputation management.
I think this is a positive sign for crisis communication consultants. [….] There have been
recent reports of successful collaboration between PR and legal, a rarity in the past”
(KR participant No. 1). Participants noted that organizations in South Korea have begun
to invite PR firms to resolve legal issues and to get support on media relations. “Recently,
overall awareness on the importance of public opinion is increasing. Communication
consultants are often invited to provide advice on public opinion even in cases where
reducing prison sentences [presumably for company executives] is being discussed”
(KR participant No. 2). All Korean participants reported having recently experienced
working with top-tier law firms to resolve client(s)’ cris(e)s together (KR participants
No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6).
Interestingly, participants noted that this realization on the part of industry, i.e., the
significant role of public opinion and PR in the area of crisis management, is not necessarily
CCIJ great news for PR; it has also resulted in non-PR consultants and/or agencies encroaching
24,1 upon territory normally claimed by PR. One PR consultant discussed this by saying, “One
other aspect is that big-scale law firms such as Kim & Chang have started to establish its
own public opinion research function with academic partners, and even media team. Law
firms have realized that they need public opinion management service for clients, so they
have decided to recruit media related partners or to invest in their capabilities. I know a
104 lawyer whose main job is managing public opinion. This is a recent trend for issue/crisis
management” (KR participant No. 1).
In South Korea, the way PR firms are invited to collaboration projects with lawyers
varies: “Some global companies hire both a PR firm and a law firm. As lobbying is illegal in
Korea, law firms usually provide public affairs services. In terms of issue management or
lawsuit, a client company hires a PR firm for issue management or to manage public opinion
during a lawsuit. A law firm introduces a PR company to a client upon a client’s request.
However, a law firm usually does not involve a PR firm in the collaboration unless the legal
firm has a strong relationship with a PR firm” (KR participant No. 5). In Singapore, PR–legal
collaboration is usually initiated through referrals from legal or management consulting
firms, i.e., such collaboration tends to stem from prior experiences that legal and/or
management consulting firms have had with PR consultants. For example, two participants
in Singapore said that they usually work with lawyers with whom they have worked before
(SG participants Nos 3 and 4). One participant noted, “What we have found is, if we have a
prior relationship with legal counsel before the crisis, it is more likely that they have
professional respect for us to start with. And we can together develop solutions more
quickly for the clients, which works better from a legal and reputational point of view. If we
have worked hand-in-hand before, we can come together just when crisis breaks out” (SG
Participant No. 3).

From courts’ opinion to public opinion

One Singaporean consultant (SG Participant No. 1) described how she helped resolve a
litigation case by convincing the top management to act transparently, which
subsequently affected other companies’ behaviors too. In a situation where a company
was debating whether or not to pursue a joint lawsuit with many other corporations that
might have been perceived negatively by the general population, she noted, “I said if you
want your money back, you should say something. [….] So I told lawyer, “are we allowed
to say yes, we will pursue the lawsuit?” The lawyer said, “Sure, why not?” In the end,
[anonymous client name] was the only company out of 12 who said that we will pursue the
case to get back the money. I said, this is a strategy in order to convince the court that you
are serious about the case. If you don’t say anything, are you serious about pursuing
the case? Because it is a joint suit, it is not only one company. […] So I said, “let’s lead
the way”. So after the CEO said that we will pursue, the rest of them followed”
(SG Participant No. 1).
Consultants in South Korea discussed their impressions of the impact of public opinion
on court cases, noting that:
The fear of public opinion is about being publically criticized, while the fear of legal action means
going to prison physically. Korean Air’s peanut U-turn case is a classic example. It was not
necessary for prosecutors to send Korean Air’s vice president to a jail, considering the privileges
Korean conglomerates usually have. But the intense media scrutiny and public criticism made
prosecutors take notice and eventually take legal action. One important point here is that public
opinion definitely influences legal decisions, such as immediate custody investigation with public
uproar. Prosecution’s office is a political organization anyway [….] After the Korean Air “peanut
U-turn” case, many business leaders have been shocked into realizing the impact of ignoring public
opinion – they could go to jail (KR participant No. 1).
Differences between motives of legal and PR practice Winning in
PR consultants from both Singapore and South Korea echoed the findings of prior literature, the court of
i.e., that lawyers and PR consultants have different perspectives and approaches to crisis public opinion
management (Cooper, 1992; Hoger and Swem, 2000; Lee et al., 1999). One major point of
departure noted by participants Nos 1 and 3 from Singapore was about expressing
empathy. Participant 1 from Singapore described this difference, saying:
So I find that the lawyers are very good at handling legal terms but they are not so familiar in the 105
compassionate part of managing situations. It is the communication people to show compassion.
The lawyers don’t care about compassion; the lawyer just wants to make sure that we don’t get
sued by another party because we said something wrong.
Participant No. 3 in Singapore also compared lawyers and PR consultants regarding
differences in approaches:
I think what we have found is that especially among more junior lawyers the tendency is to look only
at legal frames and precedents. There is a clear right or wrong in their minds, and this tends to be a
very inflexible approach. If you look at communication professionals, they tend to see more grey
areas based on their experience; things are not just either right or wrong.” (SG participant No. 3).
Interestingly, one of the Korean consultants interviewed did not view this as a barrier,
allowing for the win/lose nature of the legal profession, instead taking a more matter-of-fact
approach to these seemingly discordant motives, saying:
Naturally, all law firms’ main interest is winning the case. Although they’re not indifferent to
public sentiment, lawyers maintain their position. It’s not their scope of work to take care of
public reaction and to take any action for public opinion. […] Law firm/legal counsel’s argument
has the purpose of preventing visible damage of the company. On the other hand, PR department
concentrates on preventing relatively invisible damage. [….] They’re (lawyers) fully aware of the
importance or definition of communication during issue/crisis management. They just don’t care
about it because it’s not their responsibility. Lawyers are strategically skilled at such “on and
off,” which means this is my job or that is your job. This is not the case in our field (KR
participant No. 3).

Finding common ground

Despite differences in their motives and approaches for crisis management, PR
professionals emphasize that both lawyers and PR consultants need to work together to
find solutions for their clients, a process which can be intense and often requires urgency.
Consultants in Singapore try to understand the lawyers’ positions and to create a
synergistic effect from working together with lawyers, saying:
So I find that the advantage is that if you have a lawyer on your side, you can get things done
easily, more easily than without a lawyer. Corporate communication people always say, ‘when it
comes to difficult situation, we can only say what we can, and up to a certain point’. The lawyer is
there to reinforce […] (SG Participant No. 1).
Participant No. 3 spoke in a spirit of compromise by saying:
And it is understanding how lawyers think their approaches, meeting them half-way which I think
it means that we often do get good results for a lawyer. We can understand the constraints that the
lawyers are under, and we can recommend examples and language that have worked in the past,
and also doesn’t open too much legal risk (SG Participant No. 3).
Singaporean participants tended to place the agency of meeting half-way and finding
common ground upon themselves.
In contrast, South Korean consultants highlighted the importance of lawyers’
understanding of the impact of public opinion on reputation to come up with a solution
CCIJ for their client(s). Interestingly, a consultant used the term “war” to highlight the pressure of
24,1 public opinion organizations in crisis face, saying:
Legal counsel also have to understand the characteristics of the issues which involve the war
against public opinion. If it’s a public case, legal counsel have to collaborate with communication
consultants. Recently, lawyers’ mindsets have undergone a change, and a lot of it has to do with
how they’ve even seen prosecutors trying to sway public opinion in their favour by leaking
106 information to the media that favors them (KR participant No. 4).

Developing and finalizing co-narratives

Within a limited timeframe, both PR consultants and lawyers have to agree upon
a key message for their client. Most of the South Korean PR consultants start drafting
messages based on what they have been told of the legal position, get a review from the
legal team, and then release these messages. However, South Korean PR consultants
reported a few issues related to finalizing co-narratives, such as limited roles and
information secrecy:
The final decision about co-authoring a message is generally up to the CEO and top management
[as in the dominant coalition]; there is no set rule of thumb in place. In general, the co-authoring
process is decided by the client’s priorities. When working independently, it’s desirable not to pay
too much attention to conflicts with the law firm for the sake of client (KR participant No. 4).
Such a tentative view of the process of developing co-narratives, or a lack thereof, was
common across the South Korean participants. The participants did not indicate that the
process of developing key messages for crisis communication was collaborative; it is more
competitive in nature. One participant stated that:
Legal counsel are reluctant to share related information due to the nature of their jobs, thus PR
managers often experience ‘information vacuum’ state [….] It’s extremely rare that law firms
and PR firms draft consulting proposals together. Law firms are not that much considerate
towards other firms. PR firms don’t receive enough information from legal partners […] (KR
Participant No. 3).
Singaporean participants shared a slightly different view of the nature of the process of
developing co-narratives in their practice. Participants reported that co-narrative
development was a far more collaborative process for them than it was for South Korean
practitioners. However, the collaborative nature of the process did not preclude it from
being difficult. Different participants reported different procedures that they followed to
craft messages during a crisis, the common thread being that there was no one best way.
The process seemed to be dependent on the case, more than anything else. PR consultants
in Singapore talked about a variety of procedures that they usually followed, including
preparing a statement first and then having the legal team check it (SG Participant No. 3),
and sending the prepared statement to the CEO first and then the legal team (SG
Participant No. 1).
Some consultants noted that depending on the situation, they may be briefed by the CEO
or the legal prior to drafting a message (SG participants Nos 4 and 5). This finding was in
direct contrast to South Korea, where PR consultants discussed being concerned about legal
teams’ reticence about sharing information. Singapore-based consultants reported that they
can request briefings from the legal team, saying, “They have told us the entire story, we
have all the information possible. […] so it’s that perfect balance of bringing all of those
things together in order to mitigate as much reputational risks as possible” (SG Participant
No. 4). So, in a collaborative manner, scenario planning and education may follow such
briefing sessions in an effort to combine the expertise of legal and PR counsel. Participant
No. 3 reported that her partner legal firms in general understand the importance of
reputation and they listen to her advice, as long as it is backed up by data and experience. Winning in
She stated: the court of
We use our experiences, we come up with materials, and we share with lawyers. They might tweak public opinion
it. We will come up with first drafted those key messages, then talk to the lawyers, we usually get
broad agreements with lawyers, then it goes to the clients (SG Participant No. 3).
However, this process sometimes involves negotiation with lawyers. As one participant
explained: 107
I think the strategy is to convince the lawyer that number one, the communication people know what
they are doing and what they are saying and the communication people are offering the right counsel, in
collaboration with the right counsel on the legal team. Because when the legal team sometimes, when
they write the statements, it looks like very technical and I said nobody will understand! [… ] we are not
going to court of law, we are going to the media. The media needs to understand what we are trying to
say in simple English. So all this, I find that it is a […] negotiation with the lawyers (SG Participant No. 1).

Power relations
While Singaporean PR consultants reported the collaboration to be cooperative, balanced,
and based on mutual respect for the objectives of each, Korean consultants’ experiences
were the opposite, with collaboration reported as being driven by significant power
differences between PR and legal, with legal having the upper hand. For example,
participant No. 6 in Korea expressed his concern about PR firms being subordinate to law
firms, by saying, “partnership between those industries has not been industrialized. In
addition, the legal sector usually sees the communications expert as someone they merely
hired rather than a partner” (KR participant No. 6). Participant No. 1 was also very
concerned about the status and power discrepancy between two professional groups:
I’ve been working as communication consultant for 18 years now, and I’ve experienced some
situations of PR consultants being overruled [….] I think the PR consultant is still located at a lower
level than lawyer when evaluated directly. One example is that communication consultants rarely
have the authority for final say (KR participant No. 1).
Participant No. 2 also argued that even if PR consultants can be part of the process, legal
counsel usually lead the discussion. Participant No. 3 attributed this power difference to the
C-suite’s focus on protecting the company legally, saying:
I don’t think there’s any superior-subordinate relationship between legal and PR. But top
executives including the CEO tend to check corporate liability first from a legal perspective; legal
counsel seem to hold a relatively dominant position for CEO accessibility compared to PR (KR
participant No. 3).
In the future, the court of public opinion could serve to balance the power between lawyers
and PR practitioners.
In contrast, most participants in Singapore reported that they receive mutual respect
from their counterparts, with their relationships with lawyers being collaborative (SG
Participant Nos 1, 3, 4). A few participants were reserved when discussing the collaborative
nature of their relationship with legal counsel, stating that the collaboration was contingent
on working with the right lawyer (SG Participant Nos 3, 4), and that external legal firms can
be more powerful than PR firms (SG Participant No. 5). As one participant stated:
You know I’ve been very lucky that I’ve worked with lawyers for the past two to three years
whatever, that where we have a very good, mutual respect for one another. It’s more about each
person owning their expertise and giving the other person the right to you know, to do what they
were hired to do. I think if you meet the right lawyers and the right situation, it’s good. The clients
should set the tone as well (SG Participant No. 4).
CCIJ Interestingly, some companies may place more weight on PR than on legal (SG Participant
24,1 Nos 1 and 5). Participant No. 1 said:
Some companies put more weight on communication because they think communication is
important and lawyers should be kept in the background to approve documents. So I find that that
is still the mentality […] how to give equal weightage? I think it is a long […] long way to go and it
depends on the case. […] For [anonymous client’s name] it was a lawsuit, at the same time, the
108 challenge was also to maintain [anonymous client’s name]’s credibility to its stakeholders. So to the
CEO, he put both image and the lawsuit equally. For the [another anonymous] client, I was glad to
see that the CEO placed communication people first because we had to assist him in all the so many
issues and crises and they were all not lawsuits.
Having the PR/communication person considered more powerful than legal counsel is an
exception (Participant No. 5).

Tactics to ensure effective collaboration

PR consultants in both countries provided suggestions for PR practitioners to ensure
effective collaboration. While consultants in Singapore highlighted building relationships
with lawyers before they work on a crisis together, the ones in Korea focused on
communicating with top decision-makers. One Singapore-based PR consultant said:
I think what is very important for consultants, if you’re consultant acting for a car company, an
airline, a supermarket chain, is to make sure you have a good relationship with the legal team and
the top management in advance, and there’s no sort of ad hoc decisions being made without
thinking them through.” (SG Participant No. 2).
Participants No. 3 and 4 also had a very similar view about forming and maintaining
favorable relationship with lawyers in advance. One said:
It is not in clients’ interests to have two advisors providing contradictory advice, which is why we
try to establish relationships with legal firms ahead of the crisis, so we understand where they are
coming from where their role is, they understand where we are coming from, they also understand
that we are looking at this holistic view (SG Participant No. 3).
Meanwhile, South Korean consultants emphasized the role of and communicating with top
decision-makers for effective PR–legal collaboration:
The only way to overcome this disparity (between legal and PR) is that top decision-makers put
themselves in a sense of public affairs, acumen for public opinion, sound sociality, and genuine
stakeholder values. There’s no option but to care for strategic collaboration to win the actual
litigation case as well as in the court of public opinion […..] when the top decision maker powerfully
leads the collaboration, it’s relatively easy for both parties to cooperate. In this case, there exist no
power relations, but equal business collaboration. […] What I suggest is that PR and legal heads
hold meeting together with CEO (KR participant No. 3).
The above was said by a South Korean PR consultant.

Discussion
This study was an attempt to understand PR–legal collaboration in times of crisis from PR
practitioners’ point of view and contribute to the development of Asia-centric models of PR
practice. To do so, we interviewed PR consultants in two Asian countries – Singapore and
South Korea – to understand the status of their interprofessional collaboration with legal
counsel, and the process by which they develop co-narratives during crises. Analyses of the
interviews revealed that PR–legal collaboration has increased in recent years in both
Singapore and South Korea. Practitioners in South Korea in particular pointed to a specific
event as the turning point in heightening the importance of PR among the C-suite
complementing Plowman’s (1998) and Berger’s (2005) findings of power and PR stemming Winning in
from the dominant coalition (the core group of management decision-makers). the court of
However, PR practitioners in South Korea and Singapore experienced different forms of public opinion
interprofessional collaboration when working with legal teams on crisis management. This
interprofessional collaboration operationalized through our participants trying to find
common ground with their legal counterparts, and is known in the PR literature as
motivating self-interests, underlying values shared by both parties in a negotiation 109
(Plowman, 1996). Furthermore, practitioners in the two countries noted different power
dynamics with lawyers. While in Korea, PR–legal collaboration continues to reflect “power
over relations,” in Singapore, increasingly, is more reflective of a “power with relations”
dynamic, where both professions use “dialog, inclusion, negotiation, and shared power” for
their decision making (Berger, 2005, p. 6). PR practitioners in Singapore reported having a
fairly equal relationship with their legal counterparts and receiving respect from them, while
South Korean PR consultants reported facing several challenges that hindered effective
collaboration with their legal counterparts. In Singapore, more compromise and
accommodation were practiced. Compromise, a 50/50 split, or accommodation, where one
side wins more than the other side, is in play here as long as all parties are satisfied with the
results. In contrast, South Korean PR consultants experienced more contention, or
competition, the win/lose aspect of PR negotiation theory models (Plowman, 1998).
This situation represents the difference between collaboration as a win/win strategy and
competition as a win/lose strategy. It seems many consultants’ views reflect their
assumption of equal power relations as a desirable solution for effective crisis management,
even though in reality two professions have different roles and expertise which may not
always necessitate equal power relations. While lawyers may not agree with the views that
PR consultants shared for this study, exploring their perspectives is beyond the scope of
this research. Additionally, who has more says about the crisis may depend on types and
nature of crisis.
Although PR–legal collaboration is necessary for successful crisis management, it still
has a long way to go, particularly in South Korea. Issues of power relations, encroachment,
secrecy, and different motives and expectations between PR and legal counsel came up
consistently as tensions and conflicts that hindered effective collaboration. Although it was
not identified as a salient pattern, one participant in South Korea (KR participant No. 6)
advocated for professional accreditation of the PR profession to achieve mutual respect and
professional collaboration between PR and legal experts. As PR professionals are not
perceived to have the kind of legitimacy and power afforded to lawyers or doctors by social
systems, professional accreditation may enhance the status of PR professions as KR
participant No. 6 suggested. However, more important is whether or not the views and
suggestions from PR consultants are considered seriously by their counterparts and clients.
Therefore, we should be cautious in using the assumption of equivalence for effective
PR–legal collaboration.
This study also redirects scholarly attention to the needs of incorporating legal elements
into PR curricula at colleges and universities. Doing so may equip future PR professionals
with knowledge and skills to work with their legal brethren, and add to their arsenal of
skills. By understanding and adopting language and terms used by their legal counterparts,
it may be possible for PR professionals in Singapore and South Korea to experience less
resistance and inefficiency in their collaborations with lawyers. As our findings indicated,
many lawyers in both countries have begun to recognize the power of communication
strategy and to accommodate the communication function in their practices. It may
therefore make sense for PR education to also recognize the synergies between the two
functions and help equip future generations of PR professionals with knowledge of legalese
to reflect such trends toward PR–legal collaboration. It would be worthwhile for the
CCIJ academy to revisit PR as well as law curricula not only to identify gaps between two
24,1 different worlds but also to find solutions to reduce such gaps. As our findings indicate, it is
time for PR and law educators to collaborate to develop interdisciplinary programs that
would benefit both PR and law students who are going to work together as partners in the
future, and help advance future interprofessional collaboration.
Educators’ efforts should be extended to the business and management schools, too.
110 Another participant highlighted the importance of curriculum development at MBA schools
that would allow top executives and businesses to learn about crisis management and
public opinion management (KR participant No. 1). These notions are in line with the
previous literature on issues in interprofessional education, such as different prior
educational experiences, incompatible curricula, and requirements for professional
accreditation (Connor and Rees, 1997). Future research may explore and investigate how
these issues in the context of PR–legal collaboration are addressed in different countries
more in depth.
We believe that our findings refine and extend the arguments and suggestions made by
previous literature on PR–legal collaboration (e.g. Fitzpatrick and Rubin, 1995; Lee et al.,
1999) and on factors hindering organizational excellence (Grunig et al., 2002). We
acknowledge that other functions’ encroachment into PR (Lee et al., 1999) is not a new
phenomenon; PR encroachment has been occurring from several functions or professions,
such as accountancy firms or management consulting firms. Our findings indicated legal
encroachment into PR, especially in South Korea. In previous research, several factors such
as membership in dominant coalition, knowledge and skills in a two-way symmetrical
communication, and resource dependency have been identified as affecting encroachment
by other functions into PR (Kelly, 1994; Lauzen, 1991, 1992, 1993; Lauzen and Dozier, 1992).
However, in our study, by focusing on PR–legal collaboration process on co-narrative
development instead of encroachment into PR, we have tried to redirect attention to positive
prospects and future directions for the PR industry. Although encroachment by lawyers
into PR is still an obstacle to effective collaboration between PR and legal counsel in
South Korea, it may be a positive sign for the industry as a whole that legal counsel are
embracing the tenets of PR and understanding the importance of winning in the court of
public opinion. This court of public opinion can be represented by the power of the media,
social media, and activist groups (Berger, 2005) to equalize power among key publics or
stakeholders in any disputed situation.
Recently a participant wrote on his blog, “Many lawyers often say that the court of law
and court of public opinion are different and that the verdict in the court of law is not
affected by the verdict in the court of public opinion. However, you will not be able to tell
until you experience this: how severe the court of public opinion is and how difficult it is for
companies to recover from the negative verdict given at the court of public opinion.” The
court of public opinion leverages the power of PR to “level the playing field” or equalize the
power between lawyers and PR practitioners.
Future study may need to consider the impact of different kinds of crises in the court of
public opinion as well as in the court of law, particularly for challenges (Coombs and
Holladay, 2012). Challenge crises can occur when stakeholders perceive an organization’s
conduct to be irresponsible, but such conduct may not necessarily be legally problematic
(Lerbinger, 1997). When a challenge becomes a highly visible concern to stakeholders, it
becomes a crisis (Coombs and Holladay, 2012). In this age of the social collective and
criticism (Fournier and Avery, 2011), organizations are vulnerable to online petitions and
challenges where stakeholders request their needs to be addressed as soon as possible.
Online consumers have emerged as “ardent arbiters and commentators, providing
authoritative judgment and critique of companies and brands” (Fournier and Avery, 2011,
p. 200). With their social collective power, online consumers can cause unintended
consequences on organizations (Fournier and Avery, 2011). Digital media technology makes Winning in
it easier for those consumer publics to attract attention to a certain petition not only from the court of
media but also from other stakeholders. In such situations, how PR professionals formulate public opinion
plans and strategies to handle social challenges while fending off legal challenges, and
collaborate with legal counsel to do so, would be a key area for PR scholars to explore.
This exploratory study is not exempt from limitations. The findings from this study may
not be applicable to other countries. As data collection in both countries relied on snowball 111
sampling techniques, the participants in the interviews may not be representative
of PR consultants in South Korea and Singapore. E-mail interviews had limitations due to
their lack of richness and details compared to other forms of interviews (i.e. face-to-face or
Skype interviews). However, computer-mediated interviews including e-mail interviews can
still create a good level of understandings about phenomenon in question (Lindlof and
Taylor, 2011).

References
Beattie, A. (1995), “War and peace among the health tribes”, in Soothill, K., Mackay, L. and Webb, C.
(Eds), Interprofessional Relations in Health Care, Edward Arnold, London, pp. 11-30.
Benjamin, K. (2016), “Country case file: embracing digital marketing and PR in South Korea”, PRWeek,
March 23, available at: www.prweek.com/article/1388572/country-case-file-embracing-digital-
marketing-pr-south-korea (accessed August 30, 2017).
Berger, B.K. (2005), “Power over, power with, and power in relations: critical reflections on public
relations, the dominant coalition, and activism”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 17
No. 1, pp. 15-28.
Biggs, S. (1997), “Interprofessional collaboration: problems and prospects”, in Øveretveit, J., Mathias, P.
and Thompson, T. (Eds), Interprofessional Working for Health and Social Care, Macmillan Press,
Basingstoke, pp. 186-200.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 77-101.
Bridges, D., Davidson, R.A., Soule Odegard, P., Maki, I.V. and Tomkowiak, J. (2011), “Interprofessional
collaboration: three best practice models of interprofessional education”, Medical Education
Online, Vol. 16 No. 1.
Brooks, K.J., Wakefield, R.I. and Plowman, K.D. (2018), “Activism, prosocial public relations and
negotiation: the case of St. Vincent de Paul”, Corporate Communications: An International
Journal, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 139-150.
Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (2010), “A national interprofessional competency
framework”, available at: www.cihc.ca/files/CIHC_IPCompetencies_Feb1210.pdf (accessed
August 30, 2017).
Connor, C. and Rees, S. (1997), “Ways forward for shared learning between nursing and social work
students”, Nurse Education Today, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 494-501.
Coombs, W.T. (1995), “Choosing the right words: the development of guidelines for the selection of the
‘appropriate’ crisis-response strategies”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 8 No. 4,
pp. 447-476.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, J.S. (2012), “The paracrisis: the challenges created by publicly managing
crisis prevention”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 408-415.
Cooper, D. (1992), “CEO must weigh legal and public relations approaches”, Public Relations Journal,
Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 39-40.
Cottrell, L.S. and Sheldon, E.B. (1963), “Problems of collaboration between social scientists and the
practicing professions”, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 346,
pp. 126-137.
CCIJ Crossman, A. (2017, March 2), “Understanding purposive sampling: an overview of the method and its
24,1 applications”, available at: www.thoughtco.com/purposive-sampling-3026727 (accessed
August 30, 2017).
Curtin, P.A. and Gaither, T.K. (2012), Globalization and Public Relations in Postcolonial Nations, Cambria
Press, Amherst, NY.
D’Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., Rodrigueze, L.S.M. and Beaulieu, M.-D. (2005), “The conceptual basis
112 for interprofessional collaboration: core concepts and theoretical frameworks”, Journal of
Interprofessional Care, Vol. 19 No. S1, pp. 116-131.
Edelman (2016), “2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Singapore”, available at: www.slideshare.net/
EdelmanAPAC/2016-edelman-trust-barometer-singapore (accessed July 25, 2018).
Evans, J.A. (1994), “The role of the nurse manager in creating an environment for collaborative
practice”, Holistic Nursing Practice, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 22-31.
Fitzpatrick, K.R. (1996), “Public relations and the law: a survey of practitioners”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 1-8.
Fitzpatrick, K.R. and Rubin, M.S. (1995), “Public relations vs legal strategies in organizational crisis
decisions”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 21-33.
Focus Singapore (2017), “Top 10 PR agencies in Singapore”, February 23, available at: www.
focussingapore.com/top-10/pr-agencies.html (accessed August 30, 2017).
Fournier, S. and Avery, J. (2011), “The uninvited brand”, Business Horizons, Vol. 54 No. 3, pp. 193-207.
Freeth, D. (2001), “Sustaining interprofessional collaboration”, Journal of Interprofessional Care, Vol. 15
No. 1, pp. 37-46.
Grant, G. (1986), “Towards joint teams with joint budgets: the case of the all wales strategy”, Chant, J.
(Ed.), Health and Social Services: Collaboration or Conflict?, Discussion Paper No. 14, Policy
Studies Institute, London.
Gray, B. (1985), “Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration”, Human Relations, Vol. 38
No. 10, pp. 911-936.
Grunig, L.A., Grunig, J.E. and Dozier, D.M. (2002), Excellent Public Relations and Effective
Organizations: A Study of Communication Management in Three Countries, Lawrence Erlbaum,
Mahwah, NJ.
Halff, G. and Gregory, A. (2014), “Toward a historically informed Asian model of public relations”,
Public Relations Review, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 397-407.
Hanson, C.M., Carr, D.B. and Spross, J.A. (2000), “Collaboration”, in Hamric, A.B., Spross, J.A. and
Hanson, C.M. (Eds), Advanced Nursing Practice. An Integrative Approach, W.B. Saunders,
Philadelphia, PA, pp. 315-347.
Henneman, E.A. (1995), “Nurse-physician collaboration: a poststructuralist view”, Journal of Advanced
Nursing, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 359-363.
Henneman, E.A., Lee, J.L. and Cohen, J.I. (1995), “Collaboration: a concept analyses”, Journal of
Advanced Nursing, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 103-109.
Hoger, E.A. and Swem, L.L. (2000), “Public relations and the law in crisis mode: Texaco’s initial reaction
to incriminating tapes”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 425-445.
Holmes Report (2016), “Global top 250 PR agency ranking”, available at: www.holmesreport.com/
ranking-and-data/global-communications-report/2016-pr-agency-rankings/top-250 (accessed
August 30, 2017).
Holmes Report (2018), “Global top 250 PR agency ranking 2018”, available at: www.holmesreport.com/
ranking-and-data/global-pr-agency-rankings/2018-pr-agency-rankings/top-250 (accessed July
25, 2018).
Huang, Y.-H. and Su, S.-H. (2009), “Public relations autonomy, legal dominance, and strategic
orientation as predictors of crisis communicative strategies”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 86
No. 1, pp. 29-41.
Institute of Public Relations of Singapore (n.d.), “History of IPRS”, availalble at: http://iprs.org.sg/ Winning in
history-of-iprs (accessed August 30, 2017). the court of
Kelly, K.S. (1994), “Fund-raising encroachment and the potential of public relations departments in the public opinion
nonprofit sector”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Key, M. (2014), Public Relations in Korea: A Review of Cultural and Historical Influences, International
Public Relations Association, London, available at: www.ipra.org/news/itle/public-relations-in-
korea-a-review-of-cultural-and-historical-influences/ (accessed August 30, 2017). 113
KPRCA (n.d.), “Members”, available at: www.kprca.or.kr/member/company_list.asp (accessed May 23, 2016).
Lauzen, M. (1991), “Imperialism and encroachment in public relations”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 17,
pp. 245-255.
Lauzen, M. (1992), “Effects of gender on professional encroachment in public relations”, Journalism
Quarterly, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 173-180.
Lauzen, M. (1993), “When marketing involvement matters at the manager level”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 247-259.
Lauzen, M. and Dozier, D.M. (1992), “The missing link: the public relations manager role as mediator of
organizational environments and power consequences for the function”, Journal of Public
Relations Research, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 205-220.
Lee, J., Jares, S.M. and Heath, R.L. (1999), “Decision-making encroachment and cooperative
relationships between public relations and legal counsellors in the management of
organizational crisis”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 243-270.
Lerbinger, O. (1997), The Crisis Manager: Facing Risk and Responsibility, Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Liedtka, J.M. and Whitten, E. (1998), “Enhancing care delivery through cross-disciplinary collaboration:
a case study”, Journal of Healthcare Management, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 185-205.
Lim, S., Goh, J. and Sriramesh, K. (2005), “Applicability of the generic principles of excellent public
relations in a different cultural context: the case study of Singapore”, Journal of Public Relations
Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 315-340.
Lindlof, T.R. and Taylor, B.C. (2011), Qualitative Communication Research Methods, Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
McCann, T.D. (1994), “Win the legal battle, lose the public war”, Management Review, Vol. 83 No. 8,
pp. 43-45.
Martinelli, K.A. and Briggs, W. (1998), “Integrating public relations and legal responses during a crisis:
the case of Odwalla, Inc”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 443-460.
Mutzabaugh, B. (2017), “United Airlines CEO issues second apology, ‘I promise you we will do better’ ”,
USA Today, April 11, available at: www.usatoday.com/story/travel/flights/todayinthesky/20
17/04/11/full-text-united-ceo-munoz-apologizes-flight-3411-pledges-review/100336992/ (accessed
August 30, 2017).
Plowman, K.D. (1996), “Negotiation and two-way models of public relations”, paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Anaheim, CA, August.
Plowman, K.D. (1998), “Power in conflict for public relations”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 237-261.
Reber, B.H., Cropp, F. and Cameron, G.T. (2001), “Mythic battles: examining the lawyer-public relations
counselor dynamic”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 187-218.
Rhee, Y. (2002), “Global public relations: a cross-cultural study of the excellence theory in South Korea”,
Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 159-184.
Schneier, B. (2013), “The court of public opinion”, February 28, available at: www.schneier.com/blog/
archives/2013/02/the_court_of_pu.html (accessed August 30, 2017).
Simon, M.J. (1969), Public Relations Law, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, NY.
CCIJ Stichler, J.F. (1995), “Professional interdependence: the art of collaboration”, Advanced Practice Nursing
24,1 Quarterly, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 53-61.
Sullivan, T.J. (1998), Collaboration: A Health Care Imperative, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Tan, S.L. (2001), The State of Public Relations in Singapore, Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore.
Weerakkody, N. (2009), Research Methods for Media and Communication, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
114
Further reading
Arslanian-Engoren, C.M. (1995), “Lived experiences of CNSs who collaborate with physicians:
a phenomenological study”, Clinical Nurse Specialist, Vol. 9, pp. 68-74.
Lindeke, L.L. and Block, D.E. (1998), “Maintaining professional integrity in the midst of
interdisciplinary collaboration”, Nursing Outlook, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 213-218.
McGaughey, S.L. and De Cieri, H. (1999), “Reassessment of convergence and divergence dynamics:
implications for international HRM”, International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 235-250.

About the authors

Soojin Kim is Lecturer at University of Technology Sydney. She is interested in strategic management
of public relations, public relations strategies, public sentiment, and public behaviors.
She received her PhD in Communication from the Purdue University in 2014.
Arunima Krishna, PhD (Purdue University), is Assistant Professor of Public Relations at Boston
University’s College of Communication. Her research interests include publics’ perceptions of
controversial social issues, including issues such as vaccine hesitancy, and workplace gender
discrimination. Her research has been published in journals such as Journal of Public Relations
Research, Health Communication, Journal of Applied Communication Research, among others.
Arunima Krishna is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: krishna.arunima@gmail.com
Kenneth D. Plowman specializes in strategic management and conflict resolution in public
relations, Ken Plowman earned a Doctorate in Journalism from the University of Maryland and is now
Associate Professor of Communications at BYU. Prior to Maryland, Plowman spent 15 years in the
field of public relations. About half that time was spent on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. He then
lobbied at the state, local and federal levels for a government affairs agency, specializing in
environmental issues. Plowman’s career in public relations has followed a dual track, the other one
being in the US Army Reserve. He has served as Commander of two public affairs detachments. He is
Accredited Member of the Public Relations Society of America.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

Identity
Identity matters matters
How the relevance of a crisis to organizational
and stakeholder identities influences
reputation damage 115
Simone Mariconda, Alessandra Zamparini and Francesco Lurati
Institute of Marketing and Communication Management (IMCA), Received 14 June 2018
Revised 17 October 2018
Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, Switzerland Accepted 17 October 2018

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to conceptually develop and empirically test a model according to
which a crisis leads to a greater reputational damage when it is highly relevant to the firm’s organizational
identity or highly relevant to stakeholders’ identity.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 299 participants based in the USA were recruited online using
the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform. The study uses a 2 (relevance of crisis to organizational identity: low
vs high) × 2 (relevance of crisis to stakeholders’ identity: low vs high) between-subjects experimental design.
Findings – The results confirm the hypotheses that an organizational crisis leads to greater reputational
damage when it is highly relevant to the firm’s organizational identity or when it is highly relevant to
stakeholders’ identity. No significant interaction between the two variables was found.
Research limitations/implications – Future research could focus on further elaborating on how the two
identity-related variables tested in this paper interact with other variables that have already been studied for
moderating the effects of crises on reputation damage.
Practical implications – The paper reaffirms the deep interconnection between identity, stakeholders and
reputation. Concretely, the results of the study suggest an informative way of mapping the degree to which
risks or issues could potentially damage organizational reputation.
Originality/value – The paper contributes to the literature by providing a more situational understanding
of how the same exact crisis can damage the reputation of organizations differently. By doing so, the paper
opens several new avenues for future research.
Keywords Stakeholders, Crisis management, Corporate reputation, Organizational identity,
Stakeholder identity, Reputation damage
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Reputation damage (or reputation loss) refers to any decrease in the favorability of
stakeholders’ evaluation of a firm, following a given crisis (e.g. Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010).
A crisis may lead stakeholders to stop engaging with the organization involved in the crisis
(Coombs, 2007), thereby affecting the benefits derived from a positive reputation such as
competitiveness (e.g. Barnett and Pollock, 2012; Barney, 1991) and survival (Rao, 1994).
In this context, scholars studying crisis management and communication have dedicated an
increasing amount of effort to understanding the variables influencing the effects of crises
on reputation damage (Bundy et al., 2017) and advocated for more “research that considers
the multiple conditions that influence stakeholders’ perceptions” (Bundy et al., 2017, p. 15).
In this regards, existing research on reputation damage has remained relatively silent on
how the specificities and characteristics of the actors involved in a crisis (i.e. organizations
and their stakeholders), as well as their mutual relationship, affect the way in which people’s
perceptions are influenced by the crisis. This is somewhat surprising considering that the
literature in the field of organizational reputation has extensively discussed the relationship
Corporate Communications: An
between reputation and organizational and stakeholder identities (e.g. Cian and Servai, 2014; International Journal
Foreman et al., 2012; Huang-Horowitz and Freberg, 2016; King and Whetten, 2008; Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 115-127
Whetten and Mackey, 2002). With few recent exceptions (e.g. Wang and Wanjek, 2018; © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
Zavyalova et al., 2016), little is known regarding how the connections between the specific DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-06-2018-0069
CCIJ crisis and the identities of the organizations and stakeholders involved are influencing
24,1 reputation damage.
In this paper, through an experiment conduced online, the authors aim to address this
gap by showing how a crisis has a bigger negative effect on organizational reputation
when it is highly relevant to the firm’s organizational identity and highly relevant to
stakeholders’ identity. In this way, the authors contribute to existing research studying
116 the factors influencing the effect of crises on reputation damage (e.g. Claeys and
Cauberghe, 2010; Coombs and Holladay, 2006; Breitinger and Bonardi, 2017) by providing
a more relational and situational understanding of the way in which people make sense
and react to a crisis. The paper shows how organizational actions are embedded in a
complex social context, characterized by multiple expectations that are partially
determined by the organization itself and by the myriad of stakeholders that more or less
frequently deal with the organizations.
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. First, the authors review the literature
by looking at the variables influencing reputation damage following a crisis and consequently
develop the three hypotheses of the study. The experiment designed to test the hypotheses
and the results are then reported. The paper concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and
practical implications, as well as limitations and directions for future research.

Literature review and hypotheses

The present research looks at the effect of organizational crises on reputation damage by
focusing on the variables that influence the extent of such damage. Following previous
research with a similar approach (e.g. Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010), the focus of this paper is
on reputation damage immediately after a crisis, i.e., before the organizational response
takes place (e.g. Coombs, 2007, 2014).

Factors influencing reputation damage

The literature that looks at the phenomenon of reputation damage focuses mainly on three
key factors that are likely to influence reputation damage following a crisis. First, the
role of organizational reputation prior to the negative event (Coombs and Holladay, 2006;
Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010); second, the degree to which stakeholders perceive a firm to be
responsible for such an event (Coombs, 2007; Reuber and Fischer, 2010); and third, the role
of the source reporting the negative event (Breitinger and Bonardi, 2017). In the following
paragraphs, we review the literature on the topic.
A significant body of research has found that organizations that have a positive
reputation prior to a crisis suffer less reputation damage following a crisis than
organizations that have a less positive reputation (Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010). According
to situational crisis communication theory (SCCT), one of the main determinants of
reputation damage following a crisis is the degree to which firms have a positive reputation
prior to a crisis (Coombs, 2007). In this sense, Coombs and Holladay (2006) found that, on
some occasions, firms with a highly positive reputation before a crisis have a better
reputation after a crisis than firms with a weak reputation (they also found evidence for
what they termed the “Velcro effect” – that is, people tend to attribute more responsibility to
an organization when its pre-crisis reputation is negative). Elaborating on such findings,
Claeys and Cauberghe (2010) found that a favorable pre-crisis reputation shields
organizations from reputation damage. Interestingly, although a significant amount of
research supports the idea that a positive reputation prior to a crisis benefits the
organization (see also Love and Kraatz, 2009; Pfarrer et al., 2010), various scholars have
found that a positive reputation prior to a crisis might also lead to more negative
consequences (e.g. Coombs and Holladay, 2006; Rhee and Haunschild, 2006;
Wade et al., 2006). They, consequently, express the need to look for variables that
determine whether a positive reputation acts as a buffer and/or as a burden in times of crises Identity
(Bundy et al., 2017; Zavyalova et al., 2016). matters
The second stream of research looks at reputation damage as a function of stakeholders’
perceptions of a firm’s responsibility for the crisis. For instance, Reuber and Fischer (2010)
argued that discreditable actions are more likely to lead to reputation damage when
stakeholders perceive such actions as being controllable, certain, threatening and deviant
from industry norms. Building on attribution theory (e.g. Weiner, 1985), scholars argued 117
that stakeholders’ reaction to a crisis strongly depends on their attribution of the firm’s
responsibility. According to SCCT (Coombs, 2007), there are three separate crisis clusters,
based on the perceived firm’s responsibility, leading to increasing reputation damage. First,
there are events in which the organization is also a victim of the crisis
(e.g. natural disasters and product tampering). Others in which the organizational actions
leading to the crisis are unintentional (e.g. accidents or product failures caused by technical
errors). Finally, there are events in which organizations knowingly engage in inappropriate
behaviors putting people at risk (e.g. violation of laws and regulations, accidents caused by
human errors). In relation to such research, scholars (Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010;
Coombs and Holladay, 1996, 2002) have regularly found that greater attributions of
responsibility following a crisis lead to greater reputation damage.
The third stream of research relates to the role of third parties reporting the crisis. In this
context, scholars have argued that influential actors, when they report a crisis, have a great
effect on the reputation damage suffered by the organization involved. For instance,
Reuber and Fischer (2010) argued that media coverage about organizational misconduct
plays a key amplifying role in determining the amount of reputation damage. Vogler et al.
(2016) found that political stakeholder groups had an increased influence in shaping the
reputation of Swiss banks during the financial crisis. In a recent article, Breitinger and
Bonardi (2017) found support for the idea that the source reporting a crisis and its credibility
play a central role in determining reputation damage, whereas the severity and novelty of
the allegations do not. Such research highlights the fact that players such as NGOs and the
media play a determinant role in the social construction of firms’ reputation damage,
independently from the negative event itself.
Adding to the research discussed above, in the next paragraphs the authors build on the
literature on organizational and stakeholders’ identity (e.g. Foreman et al., 2012) and propose
that looking at the degree to which a specific crisis is more or less relevant to the identity of
the organization and of the stakeholders involved helps in developing a more situated
understanding of how crises impact and damage organizational reputations. Although
definitions and perspectives on organizational identity abound (e.g. Gioia and Hamilton,
2016; Hsu and Hannan, 2005), this paper draws on a social actor perspective, whereby
identity is defined as the set of central, enduring and distinctive (CED) traits that an
organization claims in order to describe itself. According to this view, organizations are
agentic entities that communicate their self-definition and are held accountable for their
claims by their stakeholders (King and Whetten, 2008; Whetten and Mackey, 2002).
In particular, organizations claim CED traits to positively distinguish themselves from
competitors and construct a positive reputation (Foreman et al., 2012; Rindova et al., 2005).
By claiming identity traits through various expressive means (Hatch et al., 2000),
organizations are to an extent declaring to stakeholders what to expect from them, thereby
building a reputation “for something” (Foreman et al., 2012, p. 186; Lange et al., 2011).
At the same time, organizations claim their CED traits with respect to different stakeholders
with different identities, defining “self-other relationships” (Foreman et al., 2012, p. 183) and
setting specific expectations that are relevant to the identity of particular stakeholders.
This way, organizations also build a reputation “with someone” (Foreman et al., 2012, p. 189;
Lange et al., 2011). Therefore, organizational identity plays a central role in determining the
CCIJ expectations that surround an organization, with respect to what the organization does and
24,1 to whom this is relevant. Reputation follows from the degree to which stakeholders deem
that an organization has fulfilled such expectations (Foreman et al., 2012).
On the basis of these assumptions about the relevant nexuses between organizational
identities, stakeholder identities and reputation-building, in the next two sections, we
develop hypotheses predicting how organizational identities and stakeholder identities
118 intervene in influencing reputation damage after a crisis.

Crisis relevance to organizational identity

As early as 1957, Selznick (1957) talked about the importance of “irreversible commitments”
as choices that organizations should accept and commit to, as doing otherwise would
threaten the character of the organization (p. 40). Many years later, Fombrun (1996) claimed
that a firm’s identity constrains it in the actions it takes, how it treats employees, how it
makes decisions and how it reacts to crises. However, organizational identity not only
influences pre- and post-crisis behavior, but also, as previously stated, sets fundamental
external expectations on a firms’ behavior. Identity is, in fact, “the most reliable predictor of
an organization’s conduct” (Foreman et al., 2012, p. 180). It follows that a negative event will
more likely lead to reputation damage when it violates the expectations created by a firm’s
organizational identity than when it does not. A crisis violates identity-based expectations
when it puts at stake those traits that the organization used to claim its uniqueness and to
make unrequested promises to stakeholders, calling attention to what it is particularly good
at (Foreman et al., 2012). For instance, all else being equal, we could expect a series of
product defects related to safety to be more damaging to the reputation of an organization
that has an identity strongly focused on safety (e.g. Volvo), than to the reputation of one
organization that focuses more on speed and design (e.g. Porsche). Following such
arguments, the following hypothesis is developed:
H1. A crisis leads to greater reputation damage when it is highly relevant to the firm’s
(organizational) identity.

Crisis relevance to stakeholders’ personal identity

Although the relationship between an organization’s identity and a crisis is likely to play an
important role in influencing reputation damage, scholars have also argued that stakeholders’
individual identities are likely to influence the way in which expectations surrounding a firm’s
reputation are formed (cf. reputation “with someone,” Foreman et al., 2012, p. 189).
In fact, organizational reputation is “in the eye of the beholder” (Rindova and Fombrun, 1998).
In other words, reputations reside in stakeholders’ perceptions (Fombrun, 1996). Personal
identity generally refers to the label used to describe oneself (e.g. Cook et al., 2002) and has
been found to influence preferences, intentions and behaviors (e.g. Van der Werff et al., 2013).
First, individual identities act as a lens orienting stakeholders’ attention and also as a
“driver of salience” for their perceptions (Foreman et al., 2012, p. 190). For instance, Wang and
Wanjek (2018) found that stakeholders who perceive a crisis as personally relevant are likely
to assess it as more salient and consequently show anger toward the involved organization.
Second, stakeholders might be more likely to act upon certain issues because these are
particularly relevant to their personal identity (Rowley and Moldoveanu, 2003). Even if not
linked to any rational motive or interest, stakeholders react differently to new
information because this resonates particularly with who they are and to what they
belong (e.g. Rowley and Moldoveanu, 2003; Wang and Wanjek, 2018). For instance,
all else being equal, we could expect a series of product defects related to safety to be more
damaging to the reputation of a car manufacturer that has a stakeholder base strongly
focused on safety (e.g. parents) than to the reputation of an organization that has a stakeholder Identity
base focused on speed and design (e.g. young adults). matters
Therefore, the expectations of the different stakeholders surrounding a firm are likely to
be shaped not only by the identity claimed by the organization, but also by their own
personal identities (Foreman et al., 2012; Rowley and Moldoveanu, 2003). In this sense,
personal identity shapes what stakeholders care about, what they expect from others, the
salience of events and, therefore, how organizational actions are interpreted (Foreman et al., 119
2012; Lange et al., 2011). It follows that, based on their identity, different stakeholders will
have drastically different expectations from the same firm and, consequently, will react
differently to the same organizational action. Based on these arguments, the second
hypothesis of this paper is:
H2. A crisis leads to greater reputation damage when it is highly relevant to
stakeholders’ (personal) identity.
Following the two hypotheses developed thus far, one could consequently expect an
interaction effect wherein the negative effect of a crisis on a firm’s reputation will be the
greatest when the crisis is highly relevant to organizational identity and, at the same time,
highly relevant to stakeholders’ (personal) identity. In such a case, a crisis would break the
fundamental bond that ties stakeholders and the involved organization and what matters to
both. In fact, when a firm’s and stakeholders’ identities overlap, there might be a stronger
identification that ties stakeholders to the firm (e.g. Zavyalova et al., 2016). If stakeholders
perceive that this important overlap in identities does not hold true anymore, one could
expect a greater punishment in terms of reputation damage. Therefore, the third hypothesis
of this paper is:
H3. A crisis leads to the greatest reputation damage when it is highly relevant to
stakeholders’ (personal) identity and to the firm’s (organizational) identity.

Methods
Design, stimuli and variable measurement
The authors tested the hypotheses through an experiment. The study had a 2 (relevance of
crisis to organizational identity: low vs high) × 2 (relevance of crisis to stakeholders’
identity: low vs high), full factorial, between-subjects design. A pre-test, post-test approach
was adopted to determine how the reputation of the focal company would change after a
crisis depending on relevance of the crisis to organizational identity and relevance of the
crisis to stakeholders’ identity.
Relevance of crisis to organizational identity. Two company descriptions were developed
to manipulate company identity and keep other aspects equal, such as reputation
(participants would read only one of the two descriptions). The organizational identity
manipulation was created by using typical identity markers (e.g. Schinoff et al., 2016), such
as company name, logo, mission statement and a brief extract from the two companies’
websites (i.e. “who we are” section). One company was named “Natural Skin Cosmetics” and
the other “Quali Skin Cosmetics.” According to the description provided, the first company
focused on developing natural products, whereas the second focused on developing
high-quality products. Both companies were described as well-respected by their customers,
business partners and the general population. The two company descriptions were
pre-tested with a sample of 70 participants to ensure that they would be perceived equally
positively in terms of reputation, but as having different identities (participants in the
pre-test were not part of the main study pool). Participants in the pre-test rated the two
companies using the reputation scale described below. A t-test revealed no significant
CCIJ difference in reputation (mean Natural Skin Cosmetics ¼ 5.74, SD ¼ 0.954; mean Quali Skin
24,1 Cosmetics: 5.42, SD: 0.949; t68 ¼ 1.432: p W0.05). To ensure that participants would perceive
the companies as having distinct identities, they were asked to choose from a series of
keywords, including “Nature” and “Quality” to find the one that better described the target
company’s identity. Consequently, 32 out of 34 ( ¼ 94 percent) of the participants exposed to
the Natural Skin Cosmetics description rightly indicated “Nature” as the keyword that
120 better described the company’s identity, while 33 out of 36 ( ¼ 92 percent) of the participants
exposed to the Quali Skin Cosmetics description rightly indicated “Quality” as the keyword
that better described the company’s identity. Therefore, the results of the pre-test confirmed
that the identity manipulations worked as intended.
A newspaper article describing a case of organizational misconduct was designed in
order to be highly relevant for one of the two companies (i.e. Natural Skin Cosmetics) and
less relevant for the identity of the other company (i.e. Quali Skin Cosmetics).
All participants would read the same article, in which only the name of the target
company involved would be different (all other aspects were equal). The newspaper article
reported an investigation conducted by Greenpeace that found that Natural Skin
Cosmetics/Quali Skin Cosmetics was heavily polluting oceans and contributing to wildlife
poisoning by using plastic microbeads in its products. The article was developed to look
as realistic as possible and was based on actually published articles about the topic.
Therefore, summarizing, the degree of crisis relevance to organizational identity was
manipulated by creating a crisis description that would be highly relevant for the identity
of one of the two organizations and less relevant for the identity of the other organization,
all other aspects being equal.
Relevance of crisis to stakeholders’ identity. The crisis investigated in our study involved a
case of environmental violation. Therefore, a crisis like this would be highly relevant for
people with a strong environmental self-identity and less relevant for people with a low
environmental self-identity. To assign participants to a low vs high “relevance of crisis to
stakeholders’ identity” condition, their environmental self-identity was first measured
(i.e. the degree to which they consider environmental concerns as an important part of their
identity) (Van der Werff et al., 2014). The variable was measured by adapting a scale from
previous literature (Van der Werff et al., 2014; Whitmarsh and O’Neill, 2010). The scale
asked participants to respond to three items on a seven-point scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree): “I think of myself as someone who is very
concerned with environmental issues,” “I think of myself as an environmentally friendly
person,” and “Acting environmentally friendly is an important part of who I am.” The scale
proved to be reliable (Cronbach’s α: 0.927). Participants were then assigned to a low or high
relevance condition, based on a median split on the environmental self-identity scale.
To assign participants to one of the two groups, the median point was first calculated using
SPSS (median point ¼ 5); a new dichotomous variable was then created according to which
participants with a score ⩽ 5 (n ¼ 133) were assigned to one group (low relevance of crisis to
stakeholder’s identity) and participants with a score W5 (n ¼ 117) were assigned to the
other group (high relevance of crisis to stakeholder’s identity).
Reputation damage. Reputation damage was computed by subtracting the reputation
judgments at post-test from the reputation judgment at pre-test for each individual
participant. As the hypotheses look at the magnitude of change in reputation judgments, the
absolute value of change was used (Ahluwalia et al., 2000). This way of operationalizing the
change in reputation judgments is consistent with, for instance, research in psychology
looking at attitude change (e.g. Park et al., 2007). Reputation judgments were measured
using the scale developed by Ponzi et al. (2011), which is often used in reputation research
(e.g. Deephouse and Jaskiewicz, 2013). The scale asks participants to rate the focal
organization on four items, using seven-point scales, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to Identity
7 (strongly agree): “[Company X] is a company I have a good feeling about,” “[Company X] is matters
a company that I trust,” “[Company X] is a company that I admire and respect,” and
“[Company X] has a good overall reputation.” The scale proved to be reliable in both
measurement occasions (Cronbach’s α at pre-test: 0.893; Cronbach’s α at post-test: 0.905).

Participants and procedure 121

Participants were recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk, an online service often used to
collect data for research purposes (e.g. Paolacci et al., 2010). In total, 299 people based in the
USA participated in the study (mean age: 35.17; 35.8 percent female). In the introduction of the
study, participants were told that they would take part in a study looking at their perception
of cosmetics companies, involving the reading of some materials and some questions about it.
The study followed a pre-test, post-test procedure: in the first part of the survey, during
the pre-test phase, participants answered questions about their demographics and questions
about their environmental self-identity, as described above. After these first questions,
participants were randomly assigned to read one of two descriptions regarding a fictitious
cosmetics company and provided reputation judgments of the target company.
As previously described, the company descriptions were created to manipulate the
companies’ identity. After this, participants read a negative newspaper article about
the target company involving a case of misconduct, which was designed in order to be
highly relevant for the identity of one company (i.e. Natural Skin Cosmetics, strongly
focused on nature) and less so for the identity of the other company (i.e. Quali Skin
Cosmetics, strongly focused on quality). After reading the article, during the post-test phase,
participants provided their reputation assessments for the target company and answered
some filler questions and manipulation checks.
Great care was taken in ensuring that participants were paying sufficient attention and
understood the instructions provided during the study. The survey contained one manipulation
check regarding the identity of the target company and one manipulation check regarding the
topic of the news article to which participants were exposed. Furthermore, the survey contained
an instructional manipulation check specifically designed to test participants’ attention
(Oppenheimer et al., 2009). For the analysis of the data, participants failing either one of the three
manipulation checks were removed. The final sample consisted of 250 subjects.

Results
Data were analyzed using ANOVA in order to examine how reputation damage would be
influenced by the relevance of crisis to organizational identity (low vs high) and the relevance
of crisis to stakeholders’ identity (low vs high). Tables I and II summarize the results.
H1 predicted that the negative effect of a crisis on a firm’s reputation would be greater
when the crisis is highly relevant to organizational identity. Results from the ANOVA
revealed a significant main effect of the relevance of crisis to organizational identity.
Participants in the high relevance condition expressed a significantly greater change in
reputation judgments compared to those in the low relevance condition (mean high ¼ 2.86;
mean low ¼ 2.46; F1, 246 ¼ 6.397; p o0.05). These results lend support for H1.

Source of variance df SS F p

Relevance of crisis to organizational identity (RCOI) 1 12.656 6.397 0.012 Table I.

Relevance of crisis to stakeholder identity (RCSI) 1 34.591 17.483 0.000 Analysis of
RCOI × RCSI 1 0.000 0.000 0.991 variance results
CCIJ Relevance of crisis to Relevance of crisis to
24,1 stakeholders’ identity organizational identity Mean reputation damage SD

Low Low 2.09 1.54

High 2.54 1.44
Total 2.31 1.51
High Low 2.83 1.27
122 High 3.29 1.33
Table II. Total 3.03 1.31
Mean reputation Total Low 2.46 1.46
change (and standard High 2.86 1.44
deviations) Total 2.65 1.46

H2 predicted that the negative effect of a crisis on a firm’s reputation would be greater when
the crisis is highly relevant to stakeholders’ identity. Results from the ANOVA revealed a
significant main effect of the relevance of crisis to stakeholders’ identity. Participants in the
high relevance condition expressed a significantly greater change in reputation judgments
compared to those in the low relevance condition (mean high ¼ 3.03; mean low ¼ 2.31;
F1, 246 ¼ 17.483; p o0.001). Therefore, the results also confirm H2.
H3 predicted that the negative effect of a crisis on a firm’s reputation would be the
greatest when the crisis is highly relevant to organizational identity and to stakeholders’
identity. In this case, the ANOVA results displayed no significant interaction effect between
the two variables. However, while not significantly different, the mean reputation change for
this specific group was the highest (mean ¼ 3.29).

Further analysis
In the ANOVA analysis, the continuous variable “Environmental Self-identity” was
dichotomized to assign participants to one of the two conditions (low vs high relevance of
crisis to stakeholders’ identity; see details above). Although such practice is often used in
experimental studies with an approach similar to the one of this paper (e.g. Ahluwalia et al.,
2000), it has sometimes been criticized for reducing analytical power (e.g. Irwin and McClelland,
2003). To address this issue and test for the robustness of our findings, data were also analyzed
by using regression analysis and keeping the variables continuous. The two variables,
relevance of crisis to organizational identity (0 ¼ low, 1 ¼ high) and relevance of crisis to
stakeholders’ identity (by keeping individuals’ continuous scores on the environmental self-
identity scale), were regressed on reputation change. The results of the regression indicated
that the model was significant (R2 ¼ 0.122, F2, 247 ¼ 17.224, po0.001). The effect of the
relevance of the crisis to organizational identity was significant and in the expected direction
( β ¼ 0.154; po0.05), thereby confirming H1. In addition, the effect of the relevance of the crisis
to stakeholders’ identity was significant and in the expected direction ( β ¼ 0.323; po0.001),
thereby confirming H2. When adding the interaction term between the two variables into the
regression model, no significant effect was found; H3 was, therefore, not confirmed.

Discussion
With this paper, the authors mainly contribute to enriching the research looking at how crises
influence organizational reputation by adding a new set of factors to the ones already
investigated in previous studies. As previously discussed, scholarship has mainly focused on
three sets of factors likely to influence the effects of crises on reputation damage: the role of firms’
reputation before the negative event (e.g. Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010; Coombs and Holladay,
2006), stakeholders’ perceptions of firms’ responsibility for the negative event (Coombs, 2007;
Reuber and Fischer, 2010), and the role of the source reporting the negative event (Breitinger and Identity
Bonardi, 2017). In this sense, the paper provides a more situational and contextually rich matters
understanding of the way in which people make sense of and react to a crisis, taking into account
the connections between a specific crisis and the identities of the actors involved (organizations
and stakeholders). Although the literature on organizational reputation has extensively
discussed the relationship between reputation and organizational and stakeholder identities (e.g.
Cian and Servai, 2014; Foreman et al., 2012; Huang-Horowitz and Freberg, 2016; King and 123
Whetten, 2008; Whetten and Mackey, 2002), the literature in the field of crisis management and
communication has remained relatively silent on how such identity-related variables may
influence stakeholders’ reactions to a crisis, with some exceptions (e.g. Wang and Wanjek, 2018;
Zavyalova et al., 2016). The model tested in this paper has started bringing these two bodies of
literature closer together, providing two key insights. First, a crisis has a bigger negative effect
on stakeholders’ reputation judgments when it is highly relevant to the identity of the
organization involved. Stakeholders judge organizations according to the criteria organizations
highlight as central for them. In this sense, stakeholders evaluate organizations’ ability to
maintain the promises they make. Second, a crisis has a bigger negative effect on stakeholders’
reputation judgments if it is highly relevant to their personal identity, thereby highlighting the
complexities involved in managing a firm’s reputation vis-à-vis the identities of the multiple
stakeholders that may be involved in a crisis. Taken together, these two aspects further
highlight how it is difficult to evaluate the severity of a crisis “objectively” without considering
more specific contextual factors related to the organization and its stakeholders.
Interestingly, and somewhat surprisingly, the authors did not find a significant
interaction effect between the two variables. Furthermore, according to the results presented
in the paper, it would seem that a crisis relevance to stakeholders’ personal identity makes a
greater difference than a crisis relevance to organizational identity in influencing the effects
of a crisis on reputation damage, contradicting what was suggested by previous research.
In fact, Foreman et al. (2012) claimed that organizational identity would have a dominating
role in determining stakeholders’ expectations of organizations and that, comparatively,
individual level identities would have a less significant role. More specifically, in their
discussion, the authors seemed to suggest that organizational identity would play the main
role in determining stakeholders’ expectations toward an organization and that individual
level identity would only contribute to such expectations by making certain aspects of an
organization’s identity more or less relevant to them. Our findings, including the lack of
support for H3, instead suggest that, independently of an organization’s identity,
stakeholders’ individual identity plays a determining role in influencing expectations and,
consequently, their reactions to organizational actions. Of course, before reaching any
conclusive statements in this sense, the findings reported here would have to be investigated
further by future research, as we discuss below.
In terms of managerial implications, this paper reaffirms the deep interconnection between
identity, stakeholders and reputation. Organizations are successful in managing their
reputation if they are able to keep up with the expectations they create and with the multiple
expectations deriving from stakeholder identities. Indeed, the practitioner-oriented literature
on reputation identifies stakeholders’ expectations as a main source of risk to a firm’s
reputation (e.g. Eccles et al., 2007; Fombrun et al., 2000; Honey, 2009). However, organizations
usually map risks in terms of their likelihood of occurring and in terms of the impact or
damage that they may cause (e.g. Honey, 2009). Our findings suggest a way through
which mapping of risks or issues could be refined by looking at the degree to which risks or
issues relate to a firm’s organizational identity and the identities of key stakeholders.
Managers could enrich their understanding of how such issues could potentially impact the
reputation of their organization. This could lead to innovative ways of mapping issues with
more sensitivity to specificities of the organization and of its stakeholder base.
CCIJ As with any other study, this paper has a series of limitations that could be addressed by
24,1 future research. First, the authors did not find confirmation for an interaction effect between
the two variables investigated in the study. Such a lack of significant results could be
related to the specific manipulations or to the operationalization of the variables adopted in
this study. Indeed, the direction of the results, although not statistically significant, seems to
suggest that there might actually be the potential to find such an effect. One way of doing
124 this could be to more specifically measure or manipulate the degree of overlap between a
firm’s and stakeholders’ identity and the degree to which a crisis touches upon such aspects.
Exploring the degree to which identification influences the effect of crises on reputation
damage is a promising direction for future research.
Given the results presented in this paper, future research should focus on further
elaborating on how the two identity-related variables tested in this paper interact with other
variables that have already been studied for influencing the effects of crises on reputation
damage. For instance, one significant debate in the reputation literature, as discussed herein,
is whether a highly positive reputation works as a buffer or as a burden against negative
events (e.g. Bundy et al., 2017; Claeys and Cauberghe, 2010; Coombs and Holladay, 2006;
Zavyalova et al., 2016). For example, Zavyalova et al. (2016) found that stakeholders’ level
of identification with an organization influences the degree of continued support to
high-reputation universities following negative events. In this vein, future research could
investigate the degree to which a positive reputation works as a buffer or a burden
depending on the extent to which the crisis is relevant to the organizations’ and/or to
stakeholders’ identity. It could be argued that, if a crisis is related to the identity of key
stakeholders, the buffer role provided by the organization’s previous reputation may
decrease. In addition, future scholarship should investigate the relationship between the
variables introduced in this paper and stakeholders’ perceptions of a firm’s responsibility
for the crisis (e.g. Coombs, 2007; Coombs and Holladay, 1996, 2002; Reuber and
Fischer, 2010). It is reasonable to imagine that stakeholders would attribute more
responsibility to an organization for a crisis when the crisis is highly relevant to the
organization’s identity. Relatedly, the degree to which a crisis relates to an organization’s
identity and the consequent attributions of responsibility could also affect the availability
and adequacy of organizational responses to such crisis (e.g. Coombs, 2007, 2014).
Because of the design employed in this paper to test the hypotheses, the authors did not
take into account the dynamics that usually follow crises, such as the way in which firms’
reactions to the media allegations interact with the identity variables explored in this paper
and ultimately influence stakeholders’ reactions. Indeed, the dynamics following a crisis, such
as word of mouth, rumors and reactions from other stakeholders (e.g. opinion leaders), cannot
be easily introduced in an experimental design. More qualitative designs, based on the
in-depth study of specific crises (e.g. a longitudinal analysis of online conversations), could
dig deeper into the dynamics that unfold and into the way in which multiple factors influence
the complex sense-making process that follows organizational crises. Overall, studying such
phenomena through different approaches and methodologies and looking at different cases
would indeed improve the generalizability of the findings presented here.

Conclusion
In this paper, the authors conceptually developed and empirically tested a model according to
which a crisis leads to greater reputation damage when it is highly relevant to the firm’s
organizational identity or highly relevant to stakeholders’ identity. The paper contributes to
the literature by providing a more relational and situational understanding of how the
same exact crisis can damage the reputation of organizations differently, considering
the connections between a specific crisis and the identities of the organization and the
stakeholders involved. The paper opens several new avenues for future research. In particular,
future research could focus on further elaborating on how the two identity-related variables Identity
tested in this paper interact with each other and with other variables that have previously matters
been studied for influencing the effects of crises on reputation damage.

References
Ahluwalia, R., Burnkrant, R.E. and Rao Unnava, H. (2000), “Consumer response to negative publicity:
the moderating role of commitment”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 203-214. 125
Barnett, M.L. and Pollock, T.G. (2012), “Charting the landscape of corporate reputation research”,
in Barnett, M.L. and Pollock, T.G. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation,
Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1-15.
Barney, J. (1991), “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 99-120.
Breitinger, D. and Bonardi, J.-P. (2017), “Firms, breach of norms, and reputation damage”, Business &
Society, doi: 10.1177/0007650317695531.
Bundy, J., Pfarrer, M.D., Short, C.E. and Coombs, W.T. (2017), “Crises and crisis management: integration,
interpretation, and research development”, Journal of Management, Vol. 43 No. 6, pp. 1661-1692.
Cian, L. and Servai, S. (2014), “Under the reputation umbrella: an integrative and multidisciplinary
review for corporate image, projected image, construed image, organizational identity, and
organizational culture”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 182-199.
Claeys, A.S. and Cauberghe, V. (2010), “The role of a favorable pre-crisis reputation in protecting
organizations during crises”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 64-71.
Cook, A.J., Kerr, G.N. and Moore, K. (2002), “Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food”,
Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 557-572.
Coombs, W.T. (2007), “Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: the development and
application of situational crisis communication theory”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 163-176.
Coombs, W.T. (2014), Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (1996), “Communication and attributions in a crisis: an experimental
study in crisis communication”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 279-295.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2002), “Helping crisis managers protect reputational assets: initial
tests of the situational crisis communication theory”, Management Communication Quarterly,
Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 65-186.
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (2006), “Unpacking the halo effect: reputation and crisis management”,
Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 123-137.
Deephouse, D.L. and Jaskiewicz, P. (2013), “Do family firms have better reputations than non-family
firms? An integration of socioemotional wealth and social identity theories”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 337-360.
Eccles, R.G., Newquist, S.C. and Schatz, R. (2007), “Reputation and its risks”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 104-114.
Fombrun, C.J. (1996), Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image, Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Barnett, M.L. (2000), “Opportunity platforms and safety nets:
corporate citizenship and reputational risk”, Business and Society Review, Vol. 105 No. 1,
pp. 85-106.
Foreman, P.O., Whetten, D.A. and Mackey, A. (2012), “An identity-based view of reputation, image,
and legitimacy: clarification and distinction among related constructs”, in Barnett, M.L. and
Pollock, T.G. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp. 79-200.
CCIJ Gioia, D.A. and Hamilton, A.L. (2016), “Great debates in organizational identity study”, in Pratt, M.G.,
24,1 Schultz, M., Ashforth, B.E. and Ravasi, D. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational
Identity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 21-38.
Hatch, M.J., Schultz, M. and Larsen, M.H. (2000), The Expressive Organization: Linking Identity,
Reputation and the Corporate Brand, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Honey, G. (2009), A Short Guide to Reputation Risk, Gower Publishing, Farnham.
126 Hsu, G. and Hannan, M.T. (2005), “Identities, genres, and organizational forms”, Organization Science,
Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 474-490.
Huang-Horowitz, N.C. and Freberg, K. (2016), “Bridging organizational identity and reputation
messages online: a conceptual model”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 195-212.
Irwin, J.R. and McClelland, G.H. (2003), “Negative consequences of dichotomizing continuous predictor
variables”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 366-371.
King, G.K. and Whetten, D.A. (2008), “Rethinking the relationship between reputation and legitimacy: a
social actor conceptualization”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 192-207.
Lange, D., Lee, P.M. and Dai, Y. (2011), “Organizational reputation: a review”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 153-184.
Love, E. and Kraatz, M. (2009), “Character, conformity, or the bottom line: how and why downsizing
affected corporate reputation”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 314-335.
Oppenheimer, D.M., Meyvis, T. and Davidenko, N. (2009), “Instructional manipulation checks: detecting
satisficing to increase power”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 867-872.
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J. and Ipeirotis, P. (2010), “Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk”,
Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 411-419.
Park, H.S., Levine, T.R., Kingsley Westerman, C.Y., Orfgen, T. and Foregger, S. (2007), “The effects
of argument quality and involvement type on attitude formation and attitude change: a test of
dual-process and social judgment predictions”, Human Communication Research, Vol. 33 No. 1,
pp. 81-102.
Pfarrer, M.D., Pollock, T.G. and Rindova, V.P. (2010), “A tale of two assets: the effects of firm reputation
and celebrity on earnings surprises and investors’ reactions”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 1131-1152.
Ponzi, L.J., Fombrun, C.J. and Gardberg, N.A. (2011), “RepTrakTM: conceptualizing and validating a
short-form measure of corporate reputation”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 14 No. 1,
pp. 15-35.
Rao, H. (1994), “The social construction of reputation: certification contests, legitimization,
and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry: 1895-1912”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 29-44.
Reuber, A.R. and Fischer, E. (2010), “Organizations behaving badly: when are discreditable actions
likely to damage organizational reputation?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 39-50.
Rhee, M. and Haunschild, P.R. (2006), “The liability of good reputation: a study of product recalls in the
US automobile industry”, Organization Science, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 101-117.
Rindova, V. and Fombrun, C.J. (1998), “The eye of the beholder: the role of corporate reputation in
defining organizational identity”, in Whetten, D. and Godfrey, P. (Eds), Identity in Organization:
Developing Theory through Conversation, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 62-66.
Rindova, V.P., Williamson, I.O., Petkova, A.P. and Sever, J.M. (2005), “Being good or being known: an
empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational
reputation”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 6, pp. 1033-1049.
Rowley, T.I. and Moldoveanu, M. (2003), “When will stakeholder groups act? An interest-and identity-
based model of stakeholder group mobilization”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 28 No. 2,
pp. 204-219.
Schinoff, B., Rogers, K. and Corley, K.G. (2016), “How do we communicate who we are? Examining how Identity
organizational identity is conveyed to members”, in Pratt, M.G., Schultz, M., Ashforth, B.E. and matters
Ravasi, D. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Identity, Oxford University Press,
Oxford, pp. 219-238.
Selznick, P. (1957), Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation, Row, Peterson and
Company, Evanston, IL and New York, NY.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. and Keizer, K. (2013), “The value of environmental self-identity: the
relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental
127
preferences, intentions and behavior”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 55-63.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. and Keizer, K. (2014), “I am what I am, by looking past the present: the
influence of biospheric values and past behavior on environmental self-identity”, Environment
and Behavior, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 626-657.
Vogler, D., Schranz, M. and Eisenegger, M. (2016), “Stakeholder group influence on media reputation in
crisis periods”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 322-332.
Wade, J.B., Porac, J.F., Pollock, T.G. and Graffin, S.D. (2006), “The burden of celebrity: the impact of
CEO certification contests on CEO pay and performance”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 643-660.
Wang, Y. and Wanjek, L. (2018), “How to fix a lie? The formation of Volkswagen’s post-crisis
reputation among the German public”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 84-100.
Weiner, B. (1985), “An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion”, Psychological
Review, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 548-573.
Whetten, D.A. and Mackey, A. (2002), “A social actor conceptualization of organizational identity and
its implications for the study of organizational reputation”, Business & Society, Vol. 41 No. 4,
pp. 393-414.
Whitmarsh, L. and O’Neill, S. (2010), “Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-
identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours”, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 305-314.
Zavyalova, A., Pfarrer, M.D., Reger, R.K. and Hubbard, T.D. (2016), “Reputation as a benefit and a
burden? How stakeholders’ organizational identification affects the role of reputation following a
negative event”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 253-276.

Further reading
Albert, S. and Whetten, D.A. (1985), “Organizational identity”, in Cummings, L.L. and Staw, M.M. (Eds),
Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7, JAI, Greenwich, CT, pp. 263-295.
Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F.A. (1996), “Organizational identity and strategy as a context for the
individual”, Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 13, pp. 19-64.
Coombs, W.T. (2010), “Crisis communication: a developing field”, in Heath, R.L. (Ed.), The Sage Handbook
of Public Relations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 477-488.
Fombrun, C. (2012), “Corporate reputation: definitions, antecedents, consequences”, in Barnett, M.L.
and Pollock, T.G. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation, Oxford University
Press, Oxford, pp. 94-113.
Wartick, S.L. (1992), “The relationship between intense media exposure and change in corporate
reputation”, Business & Society, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 33-49.

Corresponding author
Simone Mariconda can be contacted at: simone.mariconda@usi.ch

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

CCIJ
24,1
128
Received 23 April 2018
Revised 24 October 2018
Accepted 27 October 2018
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 128-142
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-04-2018-0053
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
Share of voices in corporate social
responsibility (CSR) news
A comparison of sources used in press
releases and news coverage
Lisa Tam
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The use of sources in news coverage affects news audience’s perceptions of news events. To
extend existing research on inter media agenda-setting and agenda-building effects of CSR-related news, the
purpose of this paper is to explore the representation and share of voices in CSR-related news by investigating
and comparing the use of sources in press releases and news coverage.
Design/methodology/approach – This study content-analyzed the 202 CSR-related press releases
published by the two electricity providers in Hong Kong and 1,045 news articles related to the press releases
over a five-year period. A total of 402 quotes from the press releases and 1,880 quotes from the news coverage
were analyzed, including the types of sources cited, the tone of the sources and variations in the use of sources
across seven different CSR themes.
Findings – Although company representatives were quoted the most in both the press releases and news
coverage, NGOs, government representatives and industry analysts were the most frequently cited for
negative comments in the news coverage. Differences were found between the press releases and news
coverage in terms of how frequently different sources were cited, the tone attributed to those sources, and the
choice of sources across different CSR themes.
Originality/value – The findings reflect that corporations are not necessarily the most influential voice in
CSR and that other groups also have their views represented in the news media. The representation of these
voices differed by CSR themes. Corporations are advised to further explore what and how different voices are
represented in the news coverage in relation to their CSR activities and to consider these voices when making
decisions about CSR.
Keywords CSR, Corporate social responsibility, Sources, News coverage, Press releases
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Corporations’ dissemination of information about their corporate social responsibility
(hereinafter CSR) activities is essential for their reputation and legitimacy (Bachmann and
Ingenhoff, 2016). The number of newspaper articles published about corporations’ CSR
activities is positively associated with their CSR reputation (Lee, 2016). Media attention also
motivates corporations to be involved in CSR (Gan, 2006; Zyglidopoulos et al., 2012) and to
respond to pressures from stakeholder groups (Zyglidopoulos et al., 2009). Thus,
corporations are advised to create and execute communication tactics, such as news
releases, corporate websites, CSR reports and television advertising, to disseminate
messages about their CSR activities (Lee, 2016).
Although it is vital for corporations’ CSR activities to be communicated, most news
opinion pieces about CSR are negative (Carroll, 2011). Different socio-contextual factors
have varying degrees of effects on how the news media interprets and reports CSR
activities (Bae and Park, 2011), such as corporations’ crisis history (Cho and Hong, 2009), the
countries in which they operate (T.H. Lee and D. Riffe, 2017), the categories of CSR activities
in which they are involved (Tam, 2015) and the extent to which the activities are related to
their core business (Lunenberg et al., 2016). An analysis of news media’s representations
about CSR found that negative representations had associated CSR with public relations
and spinning (Zhang and Swanson, 2006).
 The news media plays a significant role in shaping the CSR discourse. It is advised that CSR news
corporations should understand how CSR news coverage is produced (Carroll, 2011),
especially the wide range of voices which are represented in the news coverage other than
the voices of the corporations themselves, including voices of their shareholders, employees
and customers as well as non-governmental organizations (hereinafter NGOs) and
community members (Hamilton, 2003; Dickson and Eckman, 2008). More research is needed
to analyze the balance of voices in CSR such as by examining how different social actors 129
and powerful corporations exercise their capacity in making their voices heard regarding
CSR (Burchell and Cook, 2006). Their ability to be represented in the news media is crucial to
influencing the broader social and political contestation of ideas about CSR. One of the
indicators that reflects their capacity in influencing the CSR discourse is the extent to which
they are represented and cited in the information subsidies provided to the news media as
well as the subsequent news coverage. The diversity of quoted sources in news coverage is
an indicator of the power discrepancies in the civic debate about CSR (e.g. Benson and
Wood, 2015). The patterns of quoted sources can influence the frames of the news coverage
and, thus, affect the debate about CSR. Quoting provides evidence that different
perspectives about a topic exist (McGlone, 2005).
Existing research on CSR has identified inter media agenda-setting effects between
information subsidies provided by corporations and press coverage (Tam, 2015) as well as
agenda-building processes from corporations and monitoring groups to the media agenda
(T.H. Lee and D. Riffe, 2017). While both of these studies have focused on the transfer of CSR
themes and issues from the corporate agenda to the media agenda, the representation of
voices in different agendas is yet to be explored. To address this research gap, this study
investigates the patterns of quoting practices in CSR-related news. Quoting is central to the
newsgathering processes and should be audience directed (Killenberg and Anderson, 1993).
It reflects the successes (or failures) of different groups in influencing the debate on CSR
(Brüggemann and Engesser, 2017). On the other hand, corporations’ and news media’s
quoting practices (as reflected in their choice of sources and their attribution of content to
these sources) can affect audience’s perceptions about the credibility of the sources and their
responses to the topic (Cole and Greer, 2013). To investigate the representation and share of
voices in CSR news, this study made a comparison of quoting practices in corporate press
releases and news coverage on CSR-related news by specifically exploring: what voices were
represented, the tones of these voices and how the representation and share of these voices
varied by different CSR themes.

Literature review
CSR communication
CSR does not have a fixed definition and can be expressed and understood in association
with different meanings by different stakeholder groups (Windell, 2007). Because diverse
discourse communities have different understanding about CSR, their perspectives can be
contested through the representation of their voices (Deetz, 2007). Existing research has
demonstrated a lack of a consistent understanding of CSR. For instance, corporations were
found to be unable to elaborate on their definitions of CSR (Azer, 2001). They were also
found to be disseminating a large amount of CSR-related information on their websites
without defining CSR (Capriotti and Moreno, 2007). A focus group study found a
discrepancy between how corporations and active moms defined and interpreted CSR
(O’Connor et al., 2008).
The communication and interpretation of CSR is an “interplay of public and
organizational narrations” (Wehmeier and Schultz, 2011, p. 479). Corporations’ framing of
CSR is affected by the stakeholders represented in the media, such as active individuals and
NGOs (Lee Hunter et al., 2013). Because civil society actors have the capacity to contribute to
CCIJ and change the CSR discourse against corporate voices (Burchell and Cook, 2006),
24,1 corporations are advised to be open to involving in a dialogue with publics about CSR
(Podnar, 2008; Du et al., 2010). Dialogue is especially needed when publics are skeptical
about CSR (Black and Hartel, 2003). Social actors are influential in changing the norms,
values and expectations about CSR (Ihlen, 2008). However, a study of six discourse
communities found that mining companies and their stakeholder groups hold conflicting
130 social purposes and are unable to be engaged in a dialogue about CSR (Hutchins et al., 2007).
Dawkins (2005) identified that skepticism toward corporate messages could result in hostile
reactions from stakeholder groups including the news media. When communicating CSR,
corporations should acknowledge differences in how different stakeholder groups
understand and interpret CSR and their different information needs.
Increased media coverage is a driving force for management to take a proactive rather
than a reactive approach to CSR (Arvidsson, 2010). News coverage on CSR does not only
describe what corporations do within society but also provides normative guidance on what
corporations should be responsible for in society (Bartlett and Devin, 2011). The news media
gives corporations social pressure to gain legitimacy through involvement in CSR
(Arvidsson, 2010) and acts as an important agent in the public sphere through which
different publics receive information about CSR-related news (Carroll, 2011). However, only
a handful of news reports had covered CSR-related news. The New York Times had less
than 20 articles a year with the term “CSR.” Most of the positive stories were related to
community, environment and health. Because positive CSR stories could protect corporate
image during crises and could ensure better financial performance, corporations were
advised to understand news values and to integrate them into their CSR reporting to attract
media coverage (Carroll, 2011). However, there is no evidence that the amount of CSR
communication influences stakeholders’ CSR-induced attributions (Parcha, 2017). It is
critical to acknowledge that there are alternative discourses challenging the corporate
discourse on CSR and that communication should be oriented toward the goals of balancing
interests and promoting shared understanding (Elving et al., 2015). While corporations’ CSR
activities have been criticized for not meeting societal expectations, corporations should find
ways to better understand the social meanings and social construction of CSR as well as its
multi-dimensional nature (Golob et al., 2018).

Quoting practices in the news media

Different voices should be contested in the CSR discourse and should be represented in
communication vehicles (Burchell and Cook, 2006; Deetz, 2007). In this respect, the news
media is a major stakeholder which defines and promotes CSR through representing and
balancing different perspectives and plays an active role in facilitating a dialogue about CSR
(Tang, 2012). In agenda-setting perspectives, news coverage on CSR sets the public agenda
about the topic and raises corporations’ awareness about CSR. The news media plays a
critical role in shaping reality (e.g. McCombs and Shaw, 1972). They build a connection
between the news events and the images of the events in the minds of the people (Lippmann,
1922). The agenda-setting theory posits that the issues that the news media chooses to
report determine news audience’s perceptions about the salience of those issues (i.e. first-
level agenda-setting effects) and that its decisions on how to report it affects how the public
perceives the issues (McCombs, 2005). During content production, issues undergo the
process of being selected, emphasized, excluded and elaborated (Weaver, 2007). The media
cannot reflect the whole reality but filters and shapes it by concentrating on certain issues
and certain elements of the issues (Carroll and McCombs, 2003). Public relations plays a
critical role in influencing how the media sets and builds its agenda through the provision of
information subsidies; it is estimated that these information subsidies account for as much
as fifty percent of the news content (Akpabio, 2005).
 On the topic of CSR, the choice of sources affects the voices audiences are exposed to CSR news
(Capuzza, 2014) and changes the overall tone of the news stories. In the process of news
production, newsmakers complete a news story with the use of sources. Sumpter and
Braddock (2002) found that newsmakers tend to choose sources which are affiliated with
businesses, governments and social groups. In turn, newsmakers’ selection of sources
gives some groups more power in getting their voices heard. It is important to understand
the use of sources because of their central role in influencing the content of news coverage 131
(Danielian and Reese, 1986). Journalists select sources which are credible and knowledgeable
about the issue (Powers and Fico, 1994). Sources are critically important to shaping
the agenda of the media (Messner and Garrison, 2011). Because journalists cannot
completely verify all the truths and judgments about an issue, sources and counter-opinions
are used to help their audience make decisions about the issue (Mencher, 2008). Sources
could be classified into two types: factual sources which provide information, and opinion
sources which offer judgments (Messner and Garrison, 2011). Sources form interpretive
communities which develop shared meanings to illustrate and contextualize the discussion
on a topic by exercising their powers to speak publicly and to define and respond to the
topic (Berkowitz and TerKeurst, 1999).
Because of the significance of information subsidies and sources in the representation of
voices (Sumpter and Braddock, 2002; Sweetser and Brown, 2008; Carroll, 2011), this study
proposes to study patterns of sources used by corporations and the news media in the
context of CSR. Regarding the exchange of information between corporations and the news
media, Kujala et al. (2009) found that news coverage about an issue is similar to the press
releases published about the issue, but the news coverage has more diverse content. The
sources that different publications choose to quote reflect their sourcing priorities; a study of
regional newspapers in Australia found that there had been a greater inclusion of women’s
voices over time (Bowd, 2015). There are also other trends in quoting practices in
newspapers, including their use of a higher number of quotes and preferences for specific
sources on certain topics (Ryfe and Kemmelmeier, 2011).
To further contribute to research on CSR communication, this study examines the
representation and share of voices in CSR-related news by comparing the sources quoted in
two selected Hong Kong corporations’ press releases and subsequent news coverage related
to those press releases. Considering existing research on the different themes of the CSR
news stories (Hamilton, 2003; Cho and Hong, 2009; Tam, 2015), it explores: the sources used
in the stories (Sumpter and Braddock, 2002), the tone of the sources (i.e. positive, neutral or
negative) (Zhang and Swanson, 2006; Buhr and Grafstrom, 2007; Lee and Carroll, 2011) and
the sources used in different CSR activities (Sumpter and Braddock, 2002). Three research
questions will be addressed:
RQ1. What are the sources used in CSR-related corporate press releases and news coverage?
RQ2. What are the tones of these sources?
RQ3. How does the use of sources vary across different CSR activities?

Method
Because of its usefulness in documenting what has been covered (Harris et al., 2001),
content analysis has been extensively used in inter media agenda-setting studies (Messner
and Garrison, 2011). To address the research questions in this study, the CSR-related press
releases from the two electricity providers in Hong Kong, CLP and Power Assets, and the
subsequent news coverage resulting from these press releases were studied. These two
electricity providers were selected because they enjoyed the monopoly of serving two
different parts of Hong Kong. Their decisions could affect the entire population. CLP was
CCIJ ranked second and Power Assets was ranked 13th in Hong Kong for their CSR
24,1 performance (Oxfam Hong Kong, 2009). An empirical study on CSR found that the Hong
Kong population prioritized economic performance as a CSR practice but was not as
supportive of CSR as their counterparts in Shanghai (Ramasamy and Yeung, 2009). Kim
and Ji (2017) found that Hong Kong people were similar to their Western counterparts in
their preference for non-corporate sources for CSR communication because of higher
132 perceived credibility.
Data were collected and analyzed in several stages. In the first stage, the press releases
published by the two electricity providers over a five-year period between 2006 and
2011 were downloaded from their corporate websites. Two coders with prior experiences
in content analysis then classified the press releases into either CSR-related or non-CSR-
related. A CSR-related press release would present corporate actions which extend the
corporations’ responsibilities from making economic profits to improving society. Both
coders had to agree on the classification for a press release to be considered CSR-related.
A total of 202 press releases were collected. In the second stage, all news articles related to
the two electricity providers were downloaded from Wisenews, a database of news coverage
published by all the 17 newspapers in Hong Kong. The name of the two electricity providers
was used as keywords for the search. Then, the two coders again classified each news article
into either CSR-related or non-CSR-related. A total of 1,045 CSR-related news articles
was collected. All of these news articles could be linked to the press releases published by
the two electricity providers, indicating that press releases had a considerable impact on the
media agenda.
To analyze the data, open coding was first conducted by the two coders on the press
releases (e.g. Pedersen, 2010) on the main themes of CSR activities and the sources used. Seven
themes were identified for CSR activities and were defined as follows. Recognition is defined
as the awards that the corporation receives in recognition of its CSR efforts. Products and
services are defined as the launch of new products or services which extend the corporation’s
social responsibilities, such as electronic statements. Operations refer to improvements made
to operational facilities, such as renewable energy. Donations and sponsorships refer to the
donations or sponsorships made to a social cause. Education refers to programs aiming to
educate the younger generations. Community refers to programs which primarily seek to
contribute to the community, such as health programs. Environment refers to environmental
programs oriented toward preserving the environment.
The process of open coding also resulted in the identification and classification of sixteen
categories of sources, including: company representatives, business partners, NGOs,
company reports, participants (in the CSR activities), customers, celebrity, professionals,
government-related representatives, professors, analysts, awarding bodies, external reports,
surveys, government documents and other. These sources were cited in the form of either
direct or indirect quotes. A total of 402 quotes from the press releases and 1,880 quotes from
the news coverage were identified and analyzed.
After identifying these categories through open coding, the press releases and news
articles were content analyzed and coded based on the categories developed. Furthermore,
the tone of the sources was coded into three categories: positive, negative or neutral. Neutral
coverage refers to content which is either both positive and negative, or factual. To ensure
consistency in the coding, the two coders first analyzed a sub-sample of 30 percent of all the
press releases and news articles. For the coding of CSR themes, a Cronbach α of 0.833 was
achieved for inter-coder reliability. The coding for sources and tone achieved perfect
inter-coder reliability, indicating complete agreement between the two coders on the codes
assigned to the sources and tone. After the completion of coding, the data were entered into
Microsoft Excel, the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, version 23) and Tableau
(version 10.3) for analysis.
Findings CSR news
This study found that the number of sources used ranged from zero to seven. In the press
releases, the number of sources used varied by the CSR theme ( χ² ¼ 91.71, df ¼ 42,
p ¼ 0.000). In total, 34.2 percent (n ¼ 69) of the press releases used one source, and
37.62 percent (n ¼ 76) used two sources. In the news coverage, the number of sources used
also varied by the CSR theme ( χ² ¼ 125.62, df ¼ 42, p ¼ 0.000). In total, 33 percent (n ¼ 345)
of the news articles used one source, and 25.3 percent (n ¼ 264) of them used two sources. 133
The sources used in the press releases differed by the CSR themes ( χ² ¼ 301.834, df ¼ 78,
p ¼ 0.000). In general, company representatives were the most frequently cited
(54.98 percent, n ¼ 221), followed by NGOs (12.44 percent, n ¼ 50), participants
(10.95 percent, n ¼ 44) and government representatives (6.72 percent, n ¼ 27). In the news
coverage, the types of sources used also differed by theme ( χ² ¼ 1,292.54, df ¼ 90, p ¼ 0.000).
Company representatives were also the most frequently cited (33.14 percent, n ¼ 623),
followed by company reports (19.04 percent, n ¼ 358), government representatives
(11.44 percent, n ¼ 215) and NGOs (10 percent, n ¼ 188). Figure 1 shows a comparison of the
percentages of sources used in press releases and news coverage. Based on this comparison,
the news coverage cited less of six groups: company representatives (−22 percent),
participants (−6 percent), business partners (−2 percent), NGOs (−2 percent), awarding
body (−2 percent) and customers (−1 percent). It cited more of six groups: company reports
(+19 percent), government representatives (+5 percent), awarding body (+4 percent), other
(+3 percent), professor (+2 percent) and celebrity (+1 percent).
Because sources are used as factual or opinion sources (Messner and Garrison, 2011) to
verify the news stories, the tone of each source cited was studied. A significant relationship
was found between the sources cited and the tone of the quotes in the press releases
( χ² ¼ 59.822, df ¼ 13, p ¼ 0.000). The same relationship was found in the news coverage
( χ² ¼ 624.37, df ¼ 30, p ¼ 0.000). This finding reflected that the sources differed in terms of
how frequently they were cited with a positive, negative or neutral tone. None of the sources
used in the press releases portrayed a negative tone. Figure 2 shows a comparison of
percentages of sources used to portray a positive tone. Based on this comparison, the news
media decreased the positive voices of four groups: company representatives (−17 percent),
NGOs (−5 percent), business partners (−2 percent) and awarding body (−1 percent), and
increased the positive voices of eight groups: company reports (+16 percent), participants
(+2 percent), professor (+2 percent), other (+2 percent), celebrity (+1 percent), government
representatives (+1 percent), analysts (+1 percent) and survey (+1 percent).

Source
Company Representatives 54.98% 33.14%
NGOs 12.44% 10.00%
Participants 10.95% 5.27%
Government Representatives 6.72% 11.44%
Business Partners 3.48% 1.38%
Awarding Body 2.24% 0.64%
Professor 1.74% 4.20%
Other 1.74% 5.21%
Customers 1.74% 0.96%
Survey 1.00% 0.90%
Professionals 1.00% 0.85%
Government Documents 0.75% 0.37%
Celebrity 0.75% 1.33%
External Reports 0.50% 0.80%
Figure 1.
Company Reports 0.00% 19.04%
A comparison of
Analysts 0.00% 4.47%
sources used in
press releases and
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
news coverage
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
CCIJ Sources
Company Representatives 60.06% 42.96%

24,1 NGOs 11.49% 6.81%

Government Representatives 6.90% 8.22%
Participants 6.61% 8.80%
Business Partners 4.02% 1.64%
Awarding Body 2.30% 1.06%
Customers 1.72% 1.76%
Other 1.72% 3.40%

134 Professors 1.44% 3.29%

Survey 1.15% 2.00%
Celebrity 0.86% 1.88%
Professionals 0.86% 1.06%
Government Documents 0.57% 0.47%
External Reports 0.29% 0.23%
Figure 2. Analysts 0.00% 0.82%
A comparison of Company Reports 0.00% 15.61%
sources with a
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
positive tone
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage

Similarly, a comparison was made for the percentages of sources used to portray a neutral
tone. Figure 3 shows the comparison. The neutral voices of five groups were decreased in
the news coverage: participants (−39 percent), NGOs (−11 percent), professionals
(−2 percent), professor (−2 percent) and awarding body (−2 percent). Compared to the
press releases, eight categories of sources were used more frequently as neutral sources in
the news coverage: company reports (+26 percent), company representatives (+14 percent),
other (+5 percent), government representatives (+4 percent), analysts (+3 percent), business
partners (+2 percent), celebrity (+1 percent) and external reports (+1 percent).
While no negative sources were used in the press releases, nine sources were portrayed
with a negative tone in the news coverage, including NGOs (32 percent, n ¼ 94), analysts
(19 percent, n ¼ 56), government representatives (16 percent, n ¼ 47), company representatives
(10 percent, n ¼ 30), professor (9 percent, n ¼ 25), company reports (6 percent, n ¼ 18), other
(4 percent, n ¼ 13), external reports (2 percent, n ¼ 7) and customers (1 percent, n ¼ 2).
Because the sources used varied by CSR themes, comparisons were made on the use of
sources in press releases and news coverage in each CSR theme. First, Figure 4 shows a
comparison for the “recognition” CSR theme. Compared to the press releases, the news
coverage cited more of company reports (+10 percent) and less of five sources: NGOs
(−3 percent), business partners (−2 percent), company representatives (−2 percent),
participants (−2 percent) and awarding body (−1 percent).

Sources
Participants 42.11% 3.06%
Company Representatives 21.05% 35.33%
NGOs 15.79% 4.59%
Government Representatives 7.89% 12.37%
Professors 5.26% 3.32%
Professionals 2.63% 0.77%
Other 2.63% 7.14%
Awarding Body 2.63% 0.38%
Analysts 0.00% 2.68%
Company Reports 0.00% 26.40%
External Reports 0.00% 0.77%
Government Documents 0.00% 0.38%
Celebrity 0.00% 1.15%
Figure 3. Customers 0.00% 0.13%
A comparison of Business Partners 0.00% 1.53%
sources with a
50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
neutral tone % of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
On the theme of products and services, Figure 5 shows a comparison which reflects that the CSR news
news coverage cited more of company reports (+16 percent), other (+10 percent), professor
(+6 percent), analysts (+2 percent), NGOs (+2 percent), business partners
(+1 percent), professionals (+1 percent), awarding body (+1 percent), external reports
(+1 percent) and government documents (+1 percent), and less of company representatives
(−17 percent), customers (−8 percent), participants (−6 percent), government
representatives (−6 percent) and celebrity (−2 percent). 135
On the theme of operations, Figure 6 shows a comparison which reflects that the news
media cited more of company reports (+26 percent), NGOs (+10 percent), government

Source
Company Representatives 68.18% 66.67%
Awarding Body 20.45% 19.61%
NGOs 4.55% 1.96%
Participants 2.27% 0.00%
Government Representatives 2.27% 1.96% Figure 4.
Business Partners 2.27% 0.00% A comparison
Company Reports 0.00% 9.80% of sources used for
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
the “recognition”
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
CSR theme

Source
Company Representatives 58.70% 41.81%
Government Representatives 19.57% 13.16%
Customers 13.04% 4.97%
Participants 6.52% 0.58%
Celebrity 2.17% 0.29%
Awarding Body 0.00% 0.58%
External Reports 0.00% 0.58%
Government Documents 0.00% 0.58%
Business Partners 0.00% 0.88%
Professionals 0.00% 0.88%
Analysts 0.00% 2.05%
NGOs 0.00% 2.34%
Professor 0.00% 5.56%
Figure 5.
Other 0.00% 9.94%
A comparison of
Company Reports 0.00% 15.79% sources used for the
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
“products and
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Releases
services” CSR theme

Source
Company Representatives 69.33% 28.86%
Business Partners 16.00% 2.30%
Government Representatives 4.00% 13.33%
Professionals 2.67% 0.80%
Participants 2.67% 0.00%
NGOs 2.67% 12.22%
Government Documents 1.33% 0.00%
Customers 1.33% 0.10%
Professor 0.00% 3.61%
Other 0.00% 3.91%
Figure 6.
External Reports 0.00% 0.90%
Company Reports 0.00% 26.35%
A comparison
Analysts 0.00% 7.62%
of sources used
for the “operations”
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
CSR theme
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
CCIJ representatives (+9 percent), analysts (+8 percent), professor (+4 percent), other
24,1 (+4 percent), and external reports (+1 percent), and less of company representatives
(−40 percent), business partners (−14 percent), participants (−3 percent), professionals
(−2 percent), customers (−1 percent) and government documents (−1 percent).
On the CSR theme of donations and sponsorships, Figure 7 shows a comparison which
reflects that the news media uses more of company reports (+11 percent), company
136 representatives (+8 percent), professor (+8 percent), and analysts (+4 percent), and less of
NGOs (−25 percent) and other (−5 percent).
On the theme of education, Figure 8 shows a comparison which reflects that the news
coverage cited more of celebrity (+10 percent), company reports (+6 percent), participants
(+2 percent), professionals (+1 percent), and professors (+1 percent), and less of NGOs
(−10 percent), company representatives (−5 percent), government representatives
(−4 percent) and business partners (−1 percent).
On the theme of environment, Figure 9 shows a comparison which reflects the news
coverage cited more of company reports (+14 percent), government representatives

Source
Company Representatives 50.00% 57.69%

Figure 7. NGOs 25.00% 0.00%

A comparison Other 12.50% 7.69%

Company Reports 12.50% 23.08%
of sources used Professor 0.00% 7.69%
for the “donations Analysts 0.00% 3.85%
and sponsorships”
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
CSR theme
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage

Source
Company Representatives 44.21% 39.47%
Participants 25.26% 26.97%
NGOs 13.68% 3.97%
Government Representatives 11.58% 7.24%
Celebrity 2.11% 11.84%
Professor 1.05% 1.97%
Other 1.05% 1.32%
Figure 8. Business Partners 1.05% 0.00%
A comparison Professionals 0.00% 1.32%
of sources used Company Reports 0.00% 5.92%
for the “education” 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
CSR theme % of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage

Source
Company Representatives 60.00% 34.65%
NGOs 20.00% 13.39%
Professor 5.00% 10.24%
Professionals 5.00% 0.00%
Participants 2.50% 7.87%
Other 2.50% 4.72%
Government Representatives 2.50% 8.66%
Government Documents 2.50% 0.79%
Figure 9.
Survey 0.00% 3.15%
A comparison External Reports 0.00% 2.36%
of sources used for Company Reports 0.00% 14.17%
the “environment”
70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
CSR theme
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
(+6 percent), professor (+5 percent), participants (+5 percent), survey (+3 percent), CSR news
external reports (+2 percent), and other (+2 percent), and less of company representatives
(−25 percent), NGOs (−7 percent), professionals (−5 percent) and government documents
(−2 percent).
Lastly, on the theme of community, Figure 10 shows a comparison which reflects the
news coverage cited more of participants (+12 percent), government representatives
(+5 percent), other (+4 percent), survey (+3 percent), celebrity (+3 percent), company reports 137
(+2 percent), professionals (+2 percent), and government documents (+1 percent), and
less of company representatives (−23 percent), NGOs (−6 percent), external reports
(−2 percent) and professor (−1 percent).

Discussion
Sources cited in news stories affect how the audience perceives the news stories; the
selection of sources could also determine whether the audience agreed or disagreed with the
story (Bosch, 2013). As corporations are not the only ones influencing the agenda on CSR,
other social actors also have access to influencing the CSR discourse (Ihlen, 2008). Because
CSR does not have fixed meanings and could have various labels attached to it (Windell,
2007), CSR should be understood and communicated in association with the different groups
associated with it.
The findings of this study have demonstrated the representation and share of voices in
CSR-related news, especially the differences in the sources used in the press releases and the
subsequent news coverage. First, a general comparison shows that the voices of company
representatives were substantially reduced in the news coverage, followed by participants
in the CSR activities and business partners. On the other hand, the news coverage cited more
of company reports, government representatives, professors and others. Second, regarding
tone, the news coverage also cited less of company representatives and more of company
reports as sources with a positive tone, and NGOs, analysts and government representatives
as sources with a negative tone. Third, across the different CSR themes, the voices of
company representatives were reduced in the news coverage, except the theme of donations
and sponsorships.
Although company representatives were the most frequently cited in the press releases
(55 percent out of all sources), the second most frequently cited source differed from theme
to theme. NGOs and the participants participating in the CSR activities involved were more
frequently used in the certain themes (i.e. donations and sponsorships, education,
community and environment) while government representatives were the second most
frequently cited source for the theme of products and services (19.5 percent) and business
partners for the theme of operations (15.6 percent). In the news coverage, company
representatives were the most frequently cited across all themes, except the “community”
theme for which participants were quoted more. The second most quoted source was

Source
Company Representatives 33.87% 27.78%
NGOs 20.97% 5.56%
Participants 19.35% 18.98%
Government Representatives 8.87% 5.09%
Professor 7.26% 6.94%
Other 6.45% 10.65%
Celebrity 1.61% 13.89%
External Reports 1.61% 0.46%
Figure 10.
Professionals 0.00% 5.09% A comparison
Company Reports 0.00% 5.56% of sources used
40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
for the “community”
% of Total Press Releases % of Total News Coverage
CSR theme
CCIJ participants for the themes of community and education, company reports for the themes of
24,1 environment, donation and sponsorship, products and services, and operations, and
awarding body for the “recognition” theme.
Davis (2000) once proposed that the increasing influence of professional public relations
in changing the patterns of the use of sources in the media required further attention,
especially when there are inequities in different groups’ access to influencing the media
138 agenda. However, newsmakers take into consideration preferences of their audience when
making sourcing selection (Kruikemeier and Lecheler, 2018). This findings from this study
indicated that although previous studies have found inter media agenda-setting effects and
agenda-building effects in CSR-related news from the corporate agenda to the media agenda
(Tam, 2015; S.Y. Lee and D. Riffe, 2017), in terms of quoting practices, the media agenda
lessened the voices of some groups while giving more voices to other sources, used negative
sources to balance the content and included the voices of other groups, such as analysts,
who were not included in the corporate agenda. This study recommends that to better
respond to the criticism that corporations are not meeting societal expectations on CSR
(Dawkins, 2005), corporations should understand and approach CSR by exploring the
representation and share of voices, especially the people and groups who have the power to
comment on their CSR activities.

Conclusion and limitations

In response to calls for more research on understanding the production of CSR-related news
(Carroll, 2011), this study examined the use of sources in CSR-related corporate press
releases and news coverage. The findings showed that the representation and share of
voices, as reflected in the sources cited and the tone of these sources, were different in the
press releases and news coverage. The news media collected additional information from
sources other than those provided to them in the press releases by the corporations and that
the news media increased the voices of some groups (by quoting them more) and decreased
the voices of some groups (by quoting them less). Particularly, company representatives
were cited less across the different CSR themes. This study also has limitations. The dataset
was from two electricity providers and 17 newspapers in Hong Kong, so the findings might
not be generalizable to other industries and countries. Further research could be conducted
to replicate the study in other industries and countries. Experimental research could also be
undertaken to investigate whether the sources used in CSR-related news stories affected
audience’s perceptions of the stories. Interviews with news reporters would be helpful for
understanding the process they went through to select sources for CSR-related news stories,
gather additional sources for the stories and achieve balance, objectivity and neutrality in
the stories.

References
Akpabio, E. (2005), “Towards a public relations’ agenda setting theory”, Journal of Social Sciences,
Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 173-176.
Arvidsson, S. (2010), “Communication of corporate social responsibility: a study of the views of
management teams in large companies”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 96 No. 3,
pp. 339-354.
Azer, A. (2001), “The ethics of corporate social responsibility: management trend of the new
millennium”, available at: www.chumirethicsfoundation.ca/files/pdf/azeralison1.pdf (accessed
March 3, 2012).
Bachmann, P. and Ingenhoff, D. (2016), “Legitimacy through CSR disclosures? The advantage
outweighs the disadvantages”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 386-394, doi: 10.1016/j.
pubrev.2016.02.008.
Bae, J. and Park, S.-A. (2011), “Socio-contextual influences on the Korean news media’s interpretation of CSR news
Samsung’s $847.6 million donation”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 141-
166, doi: 10.1080/1062726X.2010.504794.
Bartlett, J.L. and Devin, B. (2011), “Management, communication, and corporate social responsibility”,
in Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J.L. and May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate
Social Responsibility, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 45-66, doi: 10.1002/9781118083246.ch3.
Benson, R. and Wood, T. (2015), “Who says what or nothing at all? Speakers, frames, and frameless 139
quotes in unauthorized immigration news in the United States, Norway, and France”, American
Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 59 No. 7, pp. 802-821, doi: 10.1177/0002764215573257.
Berkowitz, D. and TerKeurst, J.V. (1999), “Community as interpretive community: rethinking the
journalist-source relationship”, Journal of Communication, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 125-136, doi:
10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02808.x.
Black, L.D. and Hartel, C.E.J. (2003), “The five capabilities of socially responsible companies”, Journal of
Public Affairs, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 125-144.
Bosch, B. (2013), “Beyond vox pop: the role of news sourcing and political beliefs in exemplification
effects”, Mass Communication and Society, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 217-235, doi: 10.1080/
15205436.2013.779718.
Bowd, K. (2015), “Who’s in the news? Sourcing priorities in regional newspapers”, Australian
Journalism Review, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 173-185.
Brüggemann, M. and Engesser, S. (2017), “Beyond false balance: how interpretive journalism shapes
media coverage of climate change”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 42, pp. 58-67, doi:
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.11.004.
Buhr, H. and Grafstrom, M. (2007), “The making of meaning in the media: the case of corporate social
responsibility in the Financial Times, 1988-2003”, in Hond, F.D., de Bakker, F.G.A. and
Neergaard, P. (Eds), Corporate Social Responsibility in Action: Talking, Doing and Measuring,
Ashgate Publishing Group, Oxford, pp. 15-31.
Burchell, J. and Cook, J. (2006), “Confronting the ‘corporate citizen’: shaping the discourse of corporate
social responsibility”, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy Public Policy Analysis
and Management, Vol. 26 Nos 3/4, pp. 121-137, doi: 10.1108/01443330910986306.
Capriotti, P. and Moreno, A. (2007), “Communicating corporate responsibility through corporate web
sites in Spain”, Corporate Communications, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 221-237, doi: 10.1108/
13563280710776833.
Capuzza, J.C. (2014), “Who defines gender diversity? Sourcing routines and representation in
mainstream US news stories about Transgenderism”, International Journal of Transgenderism,
Vol. 15 Nos 3-4, pp. 115-128, doi: 10.1080/15532739.2014.946195.
Carroll, C.E. (2011), “Media relations and corporate social responsibility”, in Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J.L. and
May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Social Responsibility, John Wiley
& Sons, West Sussex, pp. 423-444.
Carroll, C.E. and McCombs, M. (2003), “Agenda-setting effects of business news on the public’s images
and opinions about major corporations”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 36-46,
doi: 10.1057/palgrave.crr.1540188.
Cho, S. and Hong, Y. (2009), “Netizens’ evaluations of corporate social responsibility: content analysis
of CSR news stories and online readers’ comments”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 147-149, doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.09.012.
Cole, J.T. and Greer, J.D. (2013), “Audience response to brand journalism: the effect of frame, source, and
involvement”, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 90 No. 4, pp. 673-690, doi:
10.1177/1077699013503160.
Danielian, L.H. and Reese, S.D. (1986), “A closer look at intermedia influence on agenda-setting: the
cocaine issue of 1986”, in Shoemaker, P.J. (Ed.), Communication Campaigns about Drugs,
Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 47-66.
CCIJ Davis, A. (2000), “Public relations, news production, and changing patterns of source access in the
24,1 British national media”, Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 39-59.
Dawkins, J. (2005), “Corporate responsibility: the communication challenge”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 108-119, doi: 10.1108/13632540510621362.
Deetz, S. (2007), “Corporate governance, corporate social responsibility, and communication”, in
May, S., Cheney, G. and Roper, J. (Eds), The Debate over Corporate Social Responsibility,
140 Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 267-279.
Dickson, M.A. and Eckman, M. (2008), “Media portrayal of voluntary public reporting about corporate
social responsibility performance: does coverage encourage or discourage ethical management?”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 725-743, doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9661-z.
Du, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Sen, S. (2010), “Maximizing business returns to corporate social
responsibility (CSR): the role of CSR communication”, International Journal of Management
Reviews, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 8-19, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x.
Elving, W.J.L., Golob, U., Podnar, K., Ellerup-Nielsen, A. and Thomson, C. (2015), “The bad, the ugly
and the good: new challenges for CSR communication”, Corporate Communications:
An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 118-127, doi: 10.1108/CCIJ-02-2015-0006.
Gan, A. (2006), “The impact of public scrutiny on corporate philanthropy”, Journal of Business Ethics,
Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 217-236, doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9087-4.
Golob, U., Turkel, S., Kronegger, L. and Uzunoglu, E. (2018), “Uncovering CSR meaning networks:
a cross-national comparison of Turkey and Slovenia”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 44 No. 4,
pp. 433-443, doi: 10.1016/J.PUBREV.2018.05.003.
Hamilton, J.T. (2003), “Media coverage and corporate social responsibility”, available at: https://
shorensteincenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/2003_03_hamilton.pdf?x78124 (accessed
March 3, 2012).
Harris, P., Kolovos, I. and Lock, A. (2001), “Who sets the agenda? – An analysis of agenda setting and
press coverage in the 1999 Greek European elections”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35
Nos 9/10, pp. 1117-1135, doi: 10.1108/03090560110401947.
Hutchins, M.J., Walck, C.L., Sterk, D.P. and Campbell, G.A. (2007), “Corporate responsibility: a unifying
discourse for the mining industry?”, Greener Management International, Vol. 52, pp. 17-30.
Ihlen, Ø. (2008), “Mapping the environment for corporate social responsibility: stakeholders, publics,
and the public sphere”, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, Vol. 13 No. 2,
pp. 135-146, doi: 10.1108/13563280810869578.
Killenberg, G.M. and Anderson, R. (1993), “What is a quote? Practical, rhetorical, and ethical concerns
for journalists”, Journal of Mass Media Ethics, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 37-54, doi: 10.1207/
s15327728jmme0801_3.
Kim, S. and Ji, Y. (2017), “Chinese consumers’ expectations of corporate communication on CSR and
sustainability”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 24 No. 6,
pp. 570-588, doi: 10.1002/csr.1429.
Kruikemeier, S. and Lecheler, S. (2018), “News consumer perceptions of new journalistic sourcing
techniques”, Journalism Studies, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 632-649, doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2016.1192956.
Kujala, J., Toikka, T. and Heikkinen, A. (2009), “Communicating corporate responsibility through
media”, Progress in Industrial Ecology, An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 404-420.
Lee Hunter, M., Van Wassenhove, L.N., Besiou, M. and van Halderen, M. (2013), “The agenda-setting
power of stakeholder media”, California Management Review, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 24-49, doi:
10.1525/cmr.2013.56.1.24.
Lee, S.Y. (2016), “How can companies succeed in forming CSR reputation?”, Corporate Communications:
An International Journal, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 435-449, doi: 10.1108/CCIJ-01-2016-0009.
Lee, S.Y. and Carroll, C.E. (2011), “The emergence, variation, and evolution of corporate social
responsibility in the public sphere, 1980-2004: the exposure of firms to public debate”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 104 No. 1, pp. 115-131, doi: 10.1007/s10551-011-0893-y.
Lee, S.Y. and Riffe, D. (2017), “Who sets the corporate social responsibility agenda in the news media? CSR news
Unveiling the agenda-building process of corporations and a monitoring group”, Public Relations
Review, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 293-305, doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.02.007.
Lee, T.H. and Riffe, D. (2017), “Business news framing of corporate social responsibility in the United
States and the United Kingdom”, Business & Society, doi: 10.1177/0007650317696314.
Lippmann, W. (1922), Public Opinion, Macmillan, New York, NY.
Lunenberg, K., Gosselt, J.F. and De Jong, M.D.T. (2016), “Framing CSR fit: how corporate social 141
responsibility activities are covered by news media”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42 No. 5,
pp. 943-951, doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.11.016.
McCombs, M. (2005), “A look at agenda-setting: past, present and future”, Journalism Studies, Vol. 6
No. 4, pp. 543-557, doi: 10.1080/14616700500250438.
McCombs, M.E. and Shaw, D.L. (1972), “The agenda-setting function of mass media”, Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 176-187, doi: 10.1086/267990.
McGlone, M.S. (2005), “Contextomy: the art of quoting out of context”, Media, Culture and Society,
Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 511-522, doi: 10.1177/0163443705053974.
Mencher, M. (2008), News Reporting and Writing, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Messner, M. and Garrison, B. (2011), “Study shows some blog affect traditional news media agendas”,
Newspaper Research Journal, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 112-126.
O’Connor, A., Shumate, M. and Meister, M. (2008), “Walk the line: active moms define corporate social
responsibility”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 343-350, doi: 10.1016/j.
pubrev.2008.06.005.
Oxfam Hong Kong (2009), “Corporate social responsibility survey of Hang Seng Index constituent
companies”, available at: www.csr-asia.com/publication.php#LRQA (accessed March 3, 2012).
Parcha, J.M. (2017), “How much should a corporation communicate about corporate social responsibility?
Reputation and amount of information effects on stakeholders’ CSR-induced attributions”,
Communication Research Reports, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1080/08824096.2017.1334639.
Pedersen, E.R. (2010), “Modelling CSR: how managers understand the responsibilities of business
towards society”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 155-166, doi: 10.1007/s10551-009-
0078-0.
Podnar, K. (2008), “Communicating corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Marketing
Communications, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 75-81, doi: 10.1080/13527260701856350.
Powers, A. and Fico, F. (1994), “Influences on use of sources at large US newspapers”, Newspaper
Research Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 87-97.
Ramasamy, B. and Yeung, M. (2009), “Chinese consumers’ perception of corporate social responsibility
(CSR)”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 88 No. S1, pp. 119-132, doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9825-x.
Ryfe, D.M. and Kemmelmeier, M. (2011), “Quoting practices, path dependency and the birth of modern
journalism”, Journalism Studies, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 10-26, doi: 10.1080/1461670X.2010.511943.
Sumpter, B.R.S. and Braddock, M.A. (2002), “Source use in a ‘news disaster’ account: a content analysis
of voter news service stories”, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 79 No. 3,
pp. 539-558.
Sweetser, K.D. and Brown, C.W. (2008), “Information subsidies and agenda-building during the Israel-
Lebanon crisis”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 359-366, doi: 10.1016/j.
pubrev.2008.06.008.
Tam, L. (2015), “News about corporate social responsibility (CSR): the interplay of intermedia agenda
setting influences between corporate news releases and press coverage”, Asian Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 117-130, doi: 10.1007/s13520-015-0046-y.
Tang, L. (2012), “Media discourse of corporate social responsibility in China: a content analysis of
newspapers”, Asian Journal of Communication, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 270-288, doi: 10.1080/
01292986.2012.662515.
CCIJ Weaver, D.H. (2007), “Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming”, Journal of Communication,
24,1 Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 142-147, doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00333.x.
Wehmeier, S. and Schultz, F. (2011), “Communication and corporate social responsibility: a storytelling
perspective”, in Ihlen, Ø., Bartlett, J.L. and May, S. (Eds), The Handbook of Communication and
Corporate Social Responsibility, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 467-488, doi: 10.1002/
9781118083246.ch23.
Windell, K. (2007), “The commercialization of CSR: consultants selling responsibility”, in Hond, F.D.,
142 Bakker, F.G.A.d and Neergaard, P. (Eds), Corporate Social Responsibility in Action: Talking,
Doing and Measuring, Oxford: Ashgate Publishing Group, Abingdon, pp. 48-66.
Zhang, J. and Swanson, D. (2006), “Analysis of news media’s representation of corporate social
responsibility (CSR)”, Public Relations Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 13-17.
Zyglidopoulos, S.C., Carroll, C.E., Georgiadis, A. and Siegel, D.S. (2009), “The evolution of corporate
social performance and the role of media visibility”, SSRN Electronic Journal, No. 518, doi:
10.2139/ssrn.1514385.
Zyglidopoulos, S.C., Georgiadis, A.P., Carroll, C.E. and Siegel, D.S. (2012), “Does media attention drive
corporate social responsibility?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 11, pp. 1622-1627, doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.021.

Corresponding author
Lisa Tam can be contacted at: lisalstam@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

Chinese net-roots
Leveraging interactive social third-sector
media communication for organizations

organizational success
An examination of Chinese net-roots 143
third-sector organizations’ microblog use Received 12 October 2018
Revised 23 October 2018
Feifei Chen Accepted 23 October 2018

Department of Communication, Texas A&M University,

College Station, Texas, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine how microblog communication enabled a new form of
hybrid net-roots third-sector organization that rely heavily on the internet to achieve multiple organizational
successes in civil society, social movement and service providing in China, where the government holds
predominating power over the third sector.
Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative inductive analysis was conducted to analyze two
successful organizations’ Sina tweets sent from their Weibo debuts to the dates when they achieved their first
milestone successes. In the analysis, the author iteratively alternated between emic data coding and etic
reference to literature on social movement rhetoric and nonprofits’ microblog communication.
Findings – This study developed an indigenous communication framework featuring three key
communication strategies: changing perceptions, mobilizing action, and building and maintaining
relationships, each associated with specific tactics. These strategies and tactics allowed both organizations
to tap into social media’s interactive features to engage publics and construct legitimacy.
Research limitations/implications – This paper enriches social media-based communication research
and classic social movement rhetoric, and further illustrates strategic communication’s active role in reacting
to and reforming institutional contexts. Findings from study might be extended to address similar problems
experienced by nonprofits across countries, especially within those that operate in a context where
institutional separation from a predominant government is unavailable.
Originality/value – This original communication framework developed in this study crystalizes strategic
microblog use by a nascent type of nonprofit when fulfilling functions reflects civil society, social movements
and traditional nonprofit organizations in an understudied political and social context.
Keywords Case studies, Best practice, Communication technologies, Communication management
Paper type Research paper

Social media have become commonplace in the third sector, a social space where
organizational activities between for-profit companies and the state exist (Anheier and
Seibel, 1990). Increasing academic attention has been directed to this sector on the
effectiveness of social media in fostering civil society (e.g. Howard and Hussain, 2011),
nurturing social movements (e.g. Petray, 2011) and promoting nonprofit organizations’
stakeholder engagement and information sharing (e.g. Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012). However,
largely ignored studies are in the Chinese context, where a new form of hybrid net-roots
third-sector organization has gradually emerged from its own unique political, economic and
social environment.
China’s rapid economic growth has generated many social issues, such as food safety,
environmental pollution and inequality between rural and urban areas. The Chinese Central
Corporate Communications: An
Government, while committing to and taking credit for boosting economic development, International Journal
sometimes fails to build and support timely social agendas for these issues. Thus, Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 143-161
substantial responsibilities and opportunities fall on the shoulders of the third sector. Yet © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
mainstream nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in China, especially GONGOs, or DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-10-2018-0103
CCIJ government organized nongovernmental organizations, largely have failed to muster public
24,1 trust and support due to a series of scandals (Long, 2016; Poell et al., 2014). Despite the
government’s strong sponsorship and resource support (Deng, 2010), these organizations
have been “criticized for being irresponsive and bureaucratic at best, corrupt and
scandal-ridden at worst” (Marquis et al., 2016, p. 42). Grassroots NGOs, on the other hand,
are beset with legitimacy challenges, as the restrictive political system is sensitive to
144 collective actions and alternative voices (Ho and Edmonds, 2007; Marquis et al., 2016).
Unlike GONGOs who are in a complementary relation (Young, 2000) with a dominating
government (Gidron et al., 1992), grassroots NGOs’ institutional context in China is more
complex and nuanced. To qualify as legal to operate in market and social transactions, most
nonprofit organizations need to: be affiliated with and supervised by a public agency at or
above the county level, and then register with an agency of The Ministry of Civil Affairs
that matches the administrative levels of their supervising government agencies. This dual
management system poses significant barriers to establishing legal nonprofit entities and
reinforces the third sector’s subsidiary status to the state’s administrative apparatus
(Guo and Zhang, 2013; Jing, 2015; Ru and Ortolano, 2007). Asymmetrical in power,
the third-sector’s institutional independence from the government is impossible, and
confrontation is rarely a feasible choice for legal NGOs.
But this does not mean that the government always represses grassroots nonprofits.
While demanding political compliance, the Chinese state-government now increasingly
encourages registered nonprofits to expand their organizational capacity to provide better
social services (e.g. Donahue et al., 2013; Jing and Chen, 2012) in a perceptibly complex
society. Governments at various levels have begun to regard some grassroots NGOs as
complementary rather than adversarial ( Jing, 2015). However, rigorous scrutiny and
regulation still hold for advocacy organizations, whose missions are to articulate opinions,
influence policies and promote social changes (Guo and Zhang, 2014).
In the past few years, a new form of hybrid net-roots third-sector organizations has
begun to fill the void in the third sector. Because of their reliance on the internet to gain
successes, these grassroots organizations are thus referred to as hybrid net-roots
third-sector organizations. Often launched by media-savvy founders, these grassroots
organizations rely heavily on social media platforms to achieve multiple organization
purposes, such as creating public awareness, providing social services and building social
agendas for their causes. Their organizational successes are so intertwined with social
media that Fei Deng, the founder of one such organization, lauded Sina Weibo as “the best
gift God has ever granted to Chinese people” (Fang, 2011, p. 63).
Given China’s unique political and social context, it is reasonable to expect that the
social media-based communication strategies of these organizations might differ from
those discovered in western contexts, where nonprofit organizations are defined by
complete autonomy from the government (Anheier and Salamon, 2006). Therefore, this
paper seeks to answer one overarching question: how do Chinese hybrid third-sector
organizations use social media to gain success? As an explorative study, it focuses on two
representative organizations that have relied heavily on Sina Weibo since their inception
to achieve both advocacy and service successes. The first section discusses the hybrid
nature of such organizations. This includes reviews on communication studies on social
movements, nonprofits and advocacy as the theoretical foundation for this study. After
drawing insights from theories developed mainly in the western contexts, it presents
findings from a qualitative inductive analysis of Weibo tweets generated by two hybrid
net-roots third-sector organizations. By doing so, this paper contextualizes understanding
of the social media-based communication strategies and tactics of this nascent type of
nonprofits and provides pragmatic insights for nonprofits operating in similar
institutional contexts.
Literature review Chinese net-roots
Defining hybrid nonprofit organizations as the nexus of social movement, civil society and third-sector
nonprofit sectors organizations
Traditionally, research on third-sector organizations is characterized by three distinct
theoretical perspectives: civil society, social movement and nonprofit sectors, each featuring
its own dominant organizational form (Hasenfeld and Gidron, 2005). Civil society literature
mainly examines autonomous, self-organized organizations featuring individuals’ voluntary 145
participation in their efforts to articulate preferences and demands to powerful institutions
(Read, 2007); social movement studies focus primarily on organizations promoting claims of
the underrepresented through protests and extra-institutional means; and the nonprofit
sector perspective concentrates on tax-exempt, legally acknowledged organizations that are
neither for-profit enterprises nor government agencies (Andrews and Edwards, 2004).
However, there is an increasing trend for third-sector organizations to evolve into
hybrid organizations that embrace organizational features of all three traditions and seek
to promote mutual aid, generate social changes and provide concrete services at the same
time (Minkoff, 2002). Examples include peace and conflict resolution organizations found
in Israel (Gidron et al., 2002), sustainable farming organizations in India (Brown, 2014) and
gender, racial and ethnic minority organizations in the USA (Minkoff, 2002).
Hasenfeld and Gidron (2005) thus proposed scholars should see these three research
traditions as complementary, since each specializes in explaining a specific aspect of these
hybrid organizations.
The newly emerging net-roots, social media-based organizations in China correspond to
Hasenfeld and Gidron’s (2005) description of multi-purpose hybrid organizations that differ
from strictly defined volunteer-run associations, social movement organizations and
nonprofit service organizations. First, these net-roots hybrid nonprofits in China seek to
promulgate social changes, but due to China’s asymmetrical state-nonprofit relations,
protests and noninstitutional means prevalent in western social movements are not ideal
options. Second, they provide concrete services as nonprofit service organizations, but
providing services is also a means to the end, as they wish to garner support from the
government by formulating and providing issue solutions constructively. Formal
recognition from the government is significant because it not only brings funding, but
also signifies endorsement of legitimacy, which is critical to organizational survival and
success (Zucker, 1987). Third, they thrive on citizen participation and horizontal network
relations, and thus are related with the civil society tradition as described in western
literature. Given these hybrid features, it is instructive to review advocacy and public
relations literature aligned with different traditions, in order to draw more comprehensive
insights before looking into the communication strategies and tactics of these organizations.

Rhetoric of social movements

Communication scholars have sought understanding of the rhetoric of social movements
since the 1940s ( Jensen, 2006). In response to the growing dissent in the USA in the1960s,
scholars began to examine the rhetoric of dissenters and the reactions to protest by the
decision-making establishment. Bower and Ochs’ (1971) classic piece, The Rhetoric of
Agitation and Control, was the apex work of this area. They first outline seven general
choices or strategies of agitation rhetoric, including petition of the establishment,
promulgation, solidification, polarization, escalation/confrontation, Gandhi and guerrilla
and revolution, the only nonrhetorical strategy, and four strategies of control responses
from the establishment: covering avoidance, suppression, adjustment and capitulation.
They also discuss more specific choices governed by those strategies, and label them as
tactics. Yet as Bower and Ochs’ framework was extracted from the US context, some
agitation steps such as escalation/confrontation and Gandhi and guerrilla may not be
CCIJ applicable to China because of political differences between the two countries. Nevertheless,
24,1 agitation strategies like promulgation and solidification and the distinction between
communication strategies and tactics made by Bower and Ochs might still be adopted by
the hybrid organizations in authoritarian or semi-authoritarian contexts.
To identify more generalized patterns in social movement rhetoric, Stewart (1980) offered an
alternative approach that views rhetoric “as the primary agency through which social
146 movements perform necessary functions that enable them to come into existence, to meet
opposition and perhaps, to success in bringing about (or resisting) change ” (p. 153). Building on
the work of Bruce E. Gronbeck and Herbert W. Simons, Stewart delineates a scheme with five
general functions corresponding to different functions of social movements as a process (see
Table I). These functions might be applied to the rhetorical analysis of Chinese hybrid net-roots
organizations when analyzing their communicative efforts regarding social movements. But it is
important to note that neither the frameworks offered by Stewart nor Bower and Ochs would
provide a perfect fit for the present investigation, not only because of contextual differences
regarding government–nonprofit relationships, but also because the two classic theories were
developed before social media. Actually, as rhetorical analyses of social movements have been
transformed by the proliferation and acceleration of internet technologies, scholars such as
Jensen (2006) have urged researchers to combine the legacy of previous studies with new
strategies facilitated by the internet, in order to reinvigorate studies of social movements. Using
these two classic social movement frameworks as touchstones, this study therefore also answers
calls to update research on social movement rhetoric with an underexplored type of social
movement organization, the hybrid net-roots third-sector organizations in China.

Third-sector organizations’ social media-based communication

Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn, Wikis, Listervs and
diverse mobile apps have provided significant communication potential for third-sector
organizations at relatively low costs. Apart from static brochureware functions provided by
traditional websites and mass media, social media are capable of engaging audiences and
mobilizing them into action through interactive message-sharing and social networking
(Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010). Yet, in contrast to the common perception of social media as
the least expensive avenue, researchers also found that third-sector organizations, compared
to their corporate counterparts, are not using these sites to their strongest potential due to
limited budgets and headcounts (Mansfield, 2014). Thus, enhanced understanding of how
nonprofits, especially successful ones, could use social media to enact strategic

General function Specific function

Transforming perception of history Altering perception of the past

Altering perception of the present
Altering perception of the future
Transforming perception of society Altering perception of the opposition
Altering self-perceptions
Prescribing courses of action Prescribing what must be done
Prescribing who must accomplish the task
Prescribing how the task must be accomplished
Mobilizing for action Organizing and uniting the discontented
Gaining sympathy and support from opinion leaders or legitimizers
Table I. Pressuring the opposition
Stewart’s scheme of Sustaining the social movement Justifying setbacks and delays
rhetorical functions Maintaining viability of the movement
for social movements Maintaining visibility of the movement
communication to achieve successes would help the sector to make better use of these Chinese net-roots
promising technologies. third-sector
In an attempt to develop a more comprehensive framework for understanding organizations
nonprofits’ organizational communicative functions in using Twitter, Lovejoy and Saxton
(2012) developed an information-action-community scheme based on the tweet messages
of 73 large noneducational US nonprofit organizations. The “information” function
includes tweets providing one-way information giving on the organization’s activities, 147
event highlights, or other news, facts and reports or information relevant to its
stakeholders. The “community” function, as a reflection of Twitter’s social networking
feature, refers to tweets that serve to spark or maintain interactive conversations between
the organization and the publics. Four sub-categories identified within this function are:
giving recognition and thanks, acknowledgment of current and local events, responses to
reply messages and response solicitation. The “action” function includes tweets designed
to prompt followers to “do something” for the organization. The “action” function includes
the seven sub-categories: promoting an event, donation appeal, selling a product, call for
volunteers and employees, lobbying and advocacy, joining another social media site or
voting for the organization on another site and learning how to help. This function-based
scheme was also found applicable to nonprofits’ use of Facebook (Saxton and Waters,
2014). To develop a parsimonious framework, Lovejoy and Saxton coded tweets according
to what they considered the tweet’s primary purpose. Thus, it should be noted that these
three functions are not mutually exclusive and some tweets and statuses could perform
more than one function.
Among different types of third-sector organizations, advocacy organizations’ strategic
use of social media has attracted growing scholarly attention. In these studies, advocacy is
used in its broader sense, covering any efforts to influence public policies. For example, in
the often-cited piece by Obar et al. (2012), the authors note that among studies on new media
and third-sector organizations, advocacy organizations could refer to NGOs, lobbying
organizations, pressure groups, activist groups or social movement organizations that
nurture a wide range of issues that could be addressed by governments at all levels.
Starting with a focus on whether such organizations use social media (e.g. Bortree and
Seltzer, 2009), recent work in this area has shifted to more in-depth questions, including the
effectiveness of their social media use (e.g. McPherson, 2015), why they use or do not use it
(e.g. Obar et al., 2012; Vraga et al., 2014) and how they use it (e.g. Guo and Saxton, 2014;
Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012). The last focus, how they use social media for nonprofit
advocacy, is closely aligned with the purpose of this study.
As an initial effort to answer how advocacy organizations use social media at a
message or discourse level, Guo and Saxton (2014) developed a “pyramid” model of social
media-based advocacy from a sample of 188 advocacy organizations with total revenue of
more than $1,000,000. The model entails a process of three hierarchical stages: reaching
out to people; keeping the flame alive; and stepping up to action. The organization first
reaches out and raises awareness of the organization’s cause to current and potential
supporters. After a supporter base is formed, the organization sustains their base and
keeps alive their flame of passion. Finally, mobilization to act is implemented when the
timing is right.
Since this study examines hybrid net-roots organizations related to social movements,
advocacy and nonprofits in China, the author will draw insights from all four frameworks
reviewed so far: Bower and Ochs’s (1971) rhetoric of agitation, Stewart’s (1980) five stages of
social movement development, Lovejoy and Saxton’s (2012) information-community-action
categorization scheme and Guo and Saxton’s (2014) pyramid model of social media
advocacy. Apart from the reason that the focal third-sector organizations integrate elements
identified from the above-mentioned three distinct theoretical perspectives, the rationale to
CCIJ refer to these four frameworks as foundational is also strengthened by the fact that the last
24,1 three actually share striking resemblance with each other despite different goals for
developing the frameworks. For example, the pyramid model resembles the five stages of
social movement development, as they both start from informing people and covers
mobilization for action and sustaining the momentum, which then overlap with the function-
based scheme of information-action-community. While Bower and Ochs’s piece, which
148 predates social media and focuses more on direct-action protests, seems less relevant to the
more recent frameworks, it has been applied heavily to study various types of social
movements both inside and outside the USA since 1970s (Schmidt, 2013). Given its wide
application, it is reasonable to infer that some of the tactics might also be found in social
media communication in China.
Because all of these frameworks were developed within the US context, it is necessary
to develop a specific analytical framework that accounts for Chinese hybrid net-roots
third-sector organizations’ social media communication as situated in the country’s unique
context where the government dominates its relationship with the third sector. This
consideration of contextual impact is justified by a neo-institutional perspective that
views organizations as actors who seek both effectiveness and legitimacy (Deephouse and
Suchman, 2008) by responding to requirements and expectations from their environment
(Dimaggio and Powell, 1983). Since strategic communication means actors used to
interpret, formulate and reformulate institutional rules, norms and practices (Frandsen
and Johansen, 2013; Fredriksson and Pallas, 2015), it is reasonable to expect these
successful hybrid organizations’ social media use cannot be fully accounted for by
theories developed in other institutional context. Besides, differences in social media
communication between the USA and China are found in the corporate world. For
example, by examining corporations’ social media-based relationship cultivation between
American companies’ profile pages on Facebook and those of Chinese companies on
Renren, a social media platform resembling Facebook, Men and Tsai (2012) identified
significant national differences in specific tactics when applying overarching relationship
cultivation strategies. Since their research on for-profit entities attests to the global public
relations theory of general principles and specific applications it is reasonable to assume
that the nonprofit sector in China would also have its distinct communication patterns
from what have been found in the US context.
This assumption for an indigenous framework is further bolstered by two recent studies
on Chinese nonprofits’ social media communication. Referring to Lovejoy and Saxton’s
(2012) information-action-community framework, Gao (2016) and Zhou and Pan (2016)
modified the original framework for their content analyses of message-level communication.
However, because neither study explained how or why the original frameworks were
revised, the application of their coding schemes is limited. Despite this deficiency, both
studies contribute to the development of an important panorama on Chinese nonprofits’
social media use by sampling a large number of nonprofits: the top 300 Chinese foundations
for Gao (2016) and 155 rural education nonprofits for Zhou and Pan (2016). Both studies
identified one-way information sending as the predominate use of social media. Yet, since
they focused on large samples, in-depth knowledge of how hybrid net-roots organizations
can use social media to address institutional challenges is still not available. Given the
communication success of these specific types of nonprofits as discussed earlier, one might
question how their social media-based communication converges with or diverges from
extant research findings, and whether pragmatic insights could be drawn for organizations
facing similar challenges. Thus, the literature reviewed here informed the development of
the following research question:
RQ1. What social media-based communication strategies and tactics are used by hybrid
net-roots third-sector organizations in China?
Method Chinese net-roots
Sample third-sector
To develop an initial understanding on the strategic communication practices of this organizations
emerging form of third-sector organizations in China, two representative organizations, Free
Lunch for Children (FLFC) and Love Save Pneumoconiosis (LSP) were selected. Both were
launched in 2011 and have gained substantial success in achieving multiple purposes such
as increasing the publics’ awareness of their causes, soliciting financial and human 149
resources support from the internet, providing concrete services to underrepresented groups
and generating policy changes. By selecting two organizations with similar success but
different causes, this study seeks to provide more generalizable findings for this type
of organization.
Free Lunch for Children (FLFC). Initiated by Fei Deng and other journalists, FLFC aims
to provide free school lunches for poverty-stricken children or stay-at-home rural children
whose parent(s) work as manual migrant workers in urban areas. Starting from a single
fundraising campaign to providing lunches to one primary school in April 2011 (Deng, 2014),
FLFC lacked resources in legitimacy, finance and staff, as is the case with many other
grassroots organizations. In April 2011, leaders of a local education bureau even imposed
obstacles to block their service (Bai, 2011). Nevertheless, FLFC rapidly overcame these
barriers and expanded its service to 949 schools in 26 provinces, benefiting 171,411 children
as of the end of February 2018 (Free Lunch for Children, n.d.).
Love Save Pneumoconiosis (LSP). Launched by Keqin Wang, a famous investigative
journalist, LSP has committed to serve 6m Chinese manual migrant workers suffering from
pneumoconiosis, a life-threatening occupational disease. Its organizational goals include
providing financial and medical help to pneumoconiosis patients, raising the publics’
awareness of such disease, and to ultimately urging the government to provide accessible
medical sources for 6m patients. This disease is closely related to unchecked economic
growth as manual workers contract the disease by inhaling dusts in dangerous working
conditions without proper protections. LSP also faced legitimacy challenges as their cause
could run counter to some local governments’ pursuit of economic development and tax
dollars. Nevertheless, mainly through its Weibo communication, LSP manages to generate a
huge wave of criticism of the occupational health system that ignored the benefits of manual
migrant workers (Marquis et al., 2016) and has raised more RMB 14.99m as of May 14, 2015.
Of the total, 3.15m were from the Chinese Central Government (Love Save Pneumoconiosis,
2017), which signifies forceful legitimacy endorsement by the most powerful regulative
institution (Scott, 2008) in China. By December 31, 2017, LSP has recruited 9,299 volunteers
from 26 provinces across China (Xinhua News, 2018). Till 2018, LSP is still functioning as a
hybrid third-sector organization to achieve its ultimate mission: to thoroughly eradicate
pneumoconiosis from China (Xinhua News, 2018).

Data collection
The data for this study were tweets sent by the two organizations from the dates they sent
out their first Weibo tweets to the dates when they achieved their first milestone successes.
Two reasons justify the selection of this time frame. First, it would be beyond the author’s
capacity to analyze all their Weibo tweets. As of May 4, 2016, the official Sina Weibo
accounts of FLFC and LSP have sent 30,231 and 31,929 tweets, respectively. Second, and
more importantly, both organizations now have attained and maintained legitimacy, as
evident by the Chinese Central Government’s endorsement and a large base of online
supporters. Seldom would they face legitimacy challenges anymore. However, in their early
stages, both strived to obtain legitimacy and other resources, as the government’s attitude
toward grassroots organizations is ambivalent and the entire third sector was undergoing a
CCIJ legitimacy crisis because of scandals arising from well-known nonprofits (Poell et al., 2014).
24,1 Tweets sent during their initial development stages would better capture social media
practices that helped startup nonprofits to engage publics and develop legitimacy as
compared to later stages when the organizations are more established with greater
legitimacy and other resources.
Given China’s semi-authoritarian context, the best way to pinpoint a hybrid grassroots
150 organization’s first milestone success would be the first policy change it induces, because
policy change is more challenging than other organizational goals such as raising funds and
recruiting volunteers, and often comes after other organizational goals have been achieved.
Thus, the time frame for FLFC’s tweet collection begins with April 2, 2011, the date when
the FLFC’s official Weibo account sent out its first tweet, to October 26, 2011, the date when
the Chinese Central Government officially endorsed the program with government funding
of RMB 16bn. For LSP, the time frame is set as from June 30, 2011, when its social media
account made its debut, to December 23, 2012, when the story of one of its beneficiaries, a
pneumoconiosis patient, was consecutively covered by Xinwen Lianbo (News Broadcast) for
two days. Aired by the China Central Television, the predominant state television
broadcaster in China, this news coverage is politically significant because the news program
reports and reflects official positions of the Chinese Communist Party. Soon after the
coverage, Premier Li Keqiang openly expressed concern for pneumoconiosis patients and
urged accelerated related reform on healthcare policies (Wang, 2015). Hence, these time
frames were selected to capture their social media communication at their most critical and
challenging stages during the past five years.
Following Zhou and Pan’s (2016) procedure of manually downloading Weibo tweets due
to Weibo’s encryptions on tweets and restrictions on its application programming interface,
tweets were manually downloaded from the two organizations’ Weibo webpages that
contained tweets issued during the set time frames. Through this procedure, 348 PDF files
were obtained, covering approximately 9,210 tweets in total. In addition to Weibo tweets,
mainstream media coverage of these two organizations during or about the selected time
frames also was examined to develop more contextualized understanding on their Weibo
use. Tweets sent by the two organizations were examined together. This is not to deny the
differences between the two organizations, but because they shared the same institutional
environment and achieved social media successes on the same platform, it was assumed
under a neo-institutional perspective that the strategic messaging of the two organizations
would differ only in details, not in concepts or strategies.

Analysis procedure
A qualitative inductive analysis was conducted informed by the four frameworks reviewed
earlier. The unit of analysis is the individual tweet. Prior to the analysis, the author
thoroughly read through all 348 PDF files to get a general sense of the data. This initial data
reading further confirms the practicability of combining tweets sent by two organizations
without unnecessary attention to minor agent differences that would not affect the
identification of strategic social media use. To provide a more in-depth data examination,
the author then randomly sampled 20 PDF files out of 348 for further analysis. These 20
PDF files contained 719 tweets. Since the purpose of this study is to inductively develop
general “strategies” and specific “tactics” within each strategy, as in Bower and Ochs’s
(1971) distinction between strategies and tactics, the author screened out tweets highly
similar in content, such as tweets updating fundraising progress. This procedure produced
302 tweets for the inductive analysis.
Constant comparative analysis (CCA) was used to code data. Originating from the grounded
theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967), CCA is an iterative and inductive qualitative analysis
procedure that allows categories to emerge by reducing data through constant recoding
(Fram, 2013). During the coding process, newly coded tweets were compared with previously Chinese net-roots
coded ones as well as existing literature, especially the frameworks developed for rhetorical third-sector
functions for social movement (Bowers and Ochs, 1971), nonprofits’ function-based social media organizations
use (Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012) and social media-based advocacy (Guo and Saxton, 2014), to
reduce and revise open codes and to group codes into code families. Referring to comparative
tactics developed by Boeije (2002) to analyze interviews and by Eisenhardt (1989) to develop
theory from case studies, five types of comparisons were made iteratively and constantly: 151
comparing within tweets labeled by the same code, tweets under the same code families, between
tweets coded with different labels, between tweets from different code families and among code
families. When emerging constructs were ambiguous or/and overlapping, the author discussed
constructs with a second coder until consensus was achieved. This CCA based on 302 tweets
reached theoretical saturation (Strauss and Corbin, 1998) when the constructs effectively
explained tweets that were not included in the analysis, and additional tweets were unlikely to
contribute new theoretical insights. This analysis led to the identification of 3 communication
strategies and 13 tactics, as presented in the following section.

Results
To answer the research question of what social media-based communication strategies and
tactics were used by these successful hybrid net-roots third-sector organizations, the researcher
developed an original coding scheme featuring three new strategies used in FLFC and LSP’s
Weibo-based communication: changing perceptions, mobilizing actions and building and
maintaining relationships. Each strategy is further executed by specific tactics (see Tables II–IV).

Changing perceptions
The strategy of changing perceptions refers to communication efforts to alter public
perceptions of the issue, the organization itself and/or the underrepresented group assisted by
the organization. When FLFC and LSP were found, both of their issues were generally
unknown by the public (Deng, 2014; Wang, 2015). As startup nonprofits, they would need to
gain enough legitimacy to prove their social worthiness and acquire resources (Dowling and
Pfeffer, 1975; Oliver, 1991). Apart from the liability of newness (Singh et al., 1986), their search
for legitimacy was questioned also because of the publics’ prevailing distrust of the entire
third sector’s accountability and reliability. To address these problems, the two organizations
used different tactics, including: objective information sharing, storytelling, celebrity
endorsement, expert testimony and analogy. Table II provides examples for each tactic.
Information sharing refers to straightforward, one-way exchange of facts and statistics
about the organizations’ issues and their work. Hyperlinks to other webpages often were
included to offer additional information. Storytelling is a tactic that uses emotional
narratives to describe the lives of underrepresented groups, changes brought to these people
by the organizations and volunteer and employee experiences with the organizations. Both
third-person perspectives as helpers and observers and first-person perspectives from the
underrepresented and the helped were evident, often via the forms of retweets and @.
Compared with the tactic of objective information sharing, this tactic excels in making the
abstract issues and organizational goals more specific and engaging. Celebrity endorsement
and expert testimony are similar to each other, as they both involve tapping into individuals’
credibility and influence to increase the organizations’ own. Associating celebrities and
experts with the cause attracts public attention and enhances the legitimacy of the
organization and its work. Analogy is a tactic that changes people’s perception by
comparing what happens in China to what happens in counterpart countries, or by
comparing the experiences of underrepresented groups and people to those with more
privilege. In doing so, the organizations were able to persuade people by drawing contrasts
among similar parties.
CCIJ Tactics Examplea
24,1
Objective information @Lushan Tongshuzhuang Primary School, Henan Province: On 21st, 120 students
sharing had free lunch. We spent 110 Yuan for 44 Pounds of rice 80 Yuan for 8 pounds of
pork, 85 Yuan for vegetables and 19.3Yuan for seasoning (of which, 14.3 Yuan was
spent on oil, 2 Yuan on seasoning sauce, 1 Yuan on salts and 1 Yuan on MSG).
Coupled with 26 Yuan spent on fuel, we spent altogether 320.3 Yuan). No free lunch
152 was provided on the 20 and 21st, because the school was on break due to high school
entrance exams holding on the two days
Storytelling Yesterday, LSP visited the home of Cao Fude, who died of pneumoconiosis on June
19. His 78-year-old mother lies in bed, paralyzed. She has four sons; all of them are
dead. Three of them died of pneumoconiosis. In the 1980s, the lead and zinc mine in
Ganluo brought hope to the young people. Several years later, it has left behind a
large number of death tolls. Cao Fude now occupies the coffin that was originally
brought for be his mother’s, who has bought a new one and put it next to her bed
Celebrity endorsement Welcome Kun Chenb! //@Keqin Wang: Warmly Welcome brother Kun Chen and
more caring people to join the rescue for peasant brothers! Let’s work together to
save the lives of our peasant brothers! //@ Kun Chen: I’m so sadden by the suffering
of our compatriots inflicted by pneumoconiosis in Sichuan Province! @ Keqin Wang,
Please allow me and my team to participate in rescuing these senior people! I hope
more friends will join in!
Expert testimony Thank you! //@Weigang Fuc: Free compulsory education (at poor rural areas)
should be sustained by (free) nutrition programs. When I was a college student in
Xi’an, I heard some rural areas in Shanxi Province had only two meals per day. I
thought it was just a local habit. Now I know it is only because of poverty. Thank @
FLFC, who has done such a great job with well-organized, well-planned operation
and promotion carried by professional teams! I hope grassroots organizations will all
be as effective and professional as FLFC
Analogy #Free lunch# In Senegal, free lunches are available to 115,000 students, with
120,000 students soon to be added to the program. Providing free lunches to
underprivileged students is a simple yet effective way to better their growing and
learning. With free lunches, children there have gained weight and become more
concentrated on studies, because they no longer suffer from hunger
Notes: aWeibo allowed 140 characters per post when the data were collected. Because a Chinese character
Table II. can be translated into an English word, 140 characters in Chinese language usually carry more information
Tactics to than 140 characters in English; bKun Chen is Movie Star with more than 80m followers on Sina Weibo;
c
change perceptions Weigang Fu is Column Writer, Researcher and Executive Director of Shanghai Institute of Finance and Law

Mobilizing actions
The second strategy covers communication efforts to urge the public to perform both online
and offline actions. Five tactics were identified within this strategy (see Table III): promoting
an offline event, online fundraising, crowdsourcing for organizational needs, promoting
advocacy and recruiting volunteers and employees.
Promoting offline events includes tweets inviting people to exhibitions, flash mobs, and
onsite visits. Online fundraising covers a variety of online activities to collect donations,
such as prompting online auctions among followers, selling virtual products such as a free
lunch on their e-commerce platforms, “grouponing” lunches for children and cooperating
with different mobile apps. Crowdsourcing for organizational needs refers to soliciting
diverse resources and ideas from their followers to meet multiple organizational purposes.
Within the time frames for data analysis, resources and ideas the two organizations
crowdsourced included visual designs, IT platforms, ideas for operations and promotions
and suggestions for organizational change. Promoting advocacy refers to tweets designed to
secure and increase the publics’ involvement with the cause. It could be offline, such as
asking followers to disseminate information among their friends and acquaintances about
Tactics
Promoting an offline event
Online fundraising
Crowdsourcing to meet
organizational needs
Promoting advocacy
Calling for volunteers and
employees
Examples
Chinese net-roots
third-sector
To better, FLFC, our volunteers have already set up Weibo accounts for organizations
schools we help to update timely their incomes and expenses. We invite local
government, media, NGOs, parents, ubiquitous netizens and swift
backpackers to have onsite visit and supervision!
Still relying on offline bank transactions to donate a lunch for children? Now
we pay through a barcode! Open your PayPal mobile app and scan the 153
barcode in FLFC’s poster. Yes, the one mosaic-like one! Doing charity could
be a fashion! (With hyperlink and picture of the barcode attached)
LSP is two years old now. We seek to improve ourselves and better
ourselves to pneumoconiosis peasant brothers. From 26 July to 18 August,
we solicit suggestions from all volunteers, employees and friends
specializing in diverse areas. Please help us to think about our future
directions and vision!
To save pneumoconiosis patient is to save a family! To retweet is to rescue;
and communication generates powers. Let us work together to disseminate
rescuing knowledge and make everybody aware of pneumoconiosis!
Please join #LSP# to have a fulfilling youth! If you are reliable and Table III.
interested in nonprofits, please join the big family of LSP! (with an hyperlink Tactics to
labeled as “You are wanted”) mobilize actions

Tactics Example

Acknowledging contribution 300 Yuan means one free lunch from 100 kids. We appreciate your donation
on behalf of 100 kids. //@Chendapu @FLFC: donated 300 Yuan. Wish kids
eat happily and have fun
Displaying playful #Send a red envelopea to Pumpkin Meal#PayPal Account:
organizational personality mfwc_taobao@126.com. Giving is more blessed than receiving!
Speaking the language of the We are the world; we are the children. We are the ones who make a brighter
followers day, so let’s start giving. //@Michael Jackson Club: To support @FLFC
promoted by @Feideng, we will auction one item related with MJ every
week. This week, the item is MJ souvenir necklet made 2010 for A memorial
activity hold during Shanghai Expo. Start from 100 Yuan, this auction will
close at 16 May midnight. The bidder with the highest price will get the
necklet. Fund raised will be all donated to @FLFC. Please leave your
bidding price as a comment for this tweet
Note: aDuring Chinese New Year holidays, parents would give their children a red envelope or Hong Bao, Table IV.
with money inside. Traditionally, it was believed to be a gift that could protect children from sickness and Tactics to build and
death. This tweet was outside the data sample frame as it was sent during the Chinese New Year holiday maintain relationship

the issues as well as the service and policy solutions for the issues, or it could also be online,
such as asking for retweets. In the words of Love Save Pneumoconiosis (2012), “to retweet is
to rescue”. The last tactic, calling for volunteers and employees, could be regarded as a more
engaging form of action, as such tweets inviting followers to not only support the nonprofits
financially or morally, but also to work directly with them.

Building and maintaining relationships

The last strategy, building and maintaining relationships, centers on cultivating and
sustaining interactive relationship with the publics. Tactics in this category include:
acknowledging contributions, displaying a playful organizational personality and speaking
the language of the followers (see Table IV ). Tweets recognize and appreciate follower
CCIJ donations, offline participation and online information dissemination. Although the causes
24,1 they promote are serious or even saddening, these two organizations still manage to develop
a playful organizational personality. For example, FLFC often refers to itself as Pumpkin
Meal (Can Niu Niu餐妞妞) and sometimes addresses followers as uncles, aunties, brothers
and sisters, as if the organization were a young girl at the age of the primary students it was
helping. Though LSP’s issue is sobering with many heart-breaking life-and-death stories, it
154 still develops a personality for volunteers, using a cute self-identifier “Green Orange”
(Qin Cheng 青橙, as similar with the pronunciation of LSP’s abbreviated Chinese name,
Qing Chen 清尘) with a logo of a cute orange cartoon figure to refer to its volunteers as a
whole. LSP also sometimes addresses senior patients as uncles rather than by their first or
full names. For example, when a patient was about to undergo surgery, LSP tweeted: “Uncle
Honghai Xu, fingers crossed for you!” In addition, both organizations frequently use emojis
to convey a sense of personality and emotion. The last tactic, speaking the language of the
followers, refers to audience adaptation efforts to communicate with different followers with
different vocabularies and frames of reference.

Discussion
The original communication framework developed from the CCA as grounded in the specific
institutional context offers several contributions to the existing literature on strategic
communication by hybrid third-sector organizations. To begin, it enriches research on
nonprofits through an examination of “best practices” that largely enabled the two Chinese
grassroots to achieve their organizational goals. While previous studies concluded that
Chinese and American nonprofits still rely predominately on one-way broadcasting and do
not use interactive features of social media to their full potential (e.g. Gao, 2016; Lovejoy and
Saxton, 2012; Zhou and Pan, 2016), this research identified interactivity as central to all
three new strategies developed from this study, namely, changing perceptions, mobilizing
action and building and maintaining relationships. This discovery calls into question the
wisdom of simply applying existing coding schemes to the Chinese context, and perhaps to
similar semi-authoritarian contexts as well. When strategic social media communication is a
key to organizational successes, including but not limited to the creation of legitimacy and
institutional adaption, specific interactive functions should be considered.
In FLFC and SLP’s cases, examples of human-to-human interaction (McMillan et al.,
2008) between the organizations and their followers were evident. Take the strategy of
changing perceptions for example. At first glance, this strategy seems to overlap with the
one-way information giving function identified in Lovejoy and Saxton’s (2012) scheme
(e.g. Grunig and Hunt, 1984). However, closer examination of the content of tweets using this
strategy revealed intensive, individualized interactions with volunteers, beneficiaries,
celebrities, experts and netizens at large. In contrast, Lovejoy and Saxton’s (2012) coding
scheme simply labeled these tweets as information giving and overlooked the potential of
others to participate in interpreting information, providing evidence and creating meaning.
Failure to identify interactional opportunities underestimates the role of agents outside of
the organization in providing information to create shared meaning of the issues, garner
support and address the issues effectively.
Both organizations retweeted and often added comments to first-person perspective
stories sent by their volunteers and beneficiaries. These retweets serve functions beyond
simply reporting the organizations’ actions or acknowledging volunteer contributions. By
sending either original tweets or retweets, both organizations provided timely responses to
netizens’ tweets expressing skepticism toward their accountability, transparency and
ultimately, their legitimacy. For instance, FLFC was once questioned by its followers on
why a funded rural primary school purchased oil and vegetables at a higher price than
schools in big, more affluent cities would do. To address this concern, FLFC immediately
sent tweets to urge the headmaster into an immediate response and to encourage local Chinese net-roots
volunteers to collect and report further evidence (e.g. Free Lunch for Children, 2011). third-sector
Through timely retweeting with comments from a series of posts from the headmaster, organizations
volunteers and concerned followers, the organization publicly managed the challenge within
three days. And the process would have been even shorter if the headmaster had convenient
internet access and would not have had to travel back and forth for nearly 70 h to post a
detailed explanation online in a cyber bar. 155
Compared with simply sending one-way objective information, using retweets with
comments appears more authentic and effective and demonstrates responsiveness to
concerns raised by followers. Moreover, first-person perspectives and accounts from
different stakeholders increase transparency and accountability through a form of
triangulation. Failure to differentiate interactive tactics like storytelling, celebrity
endorsement and expert testimony from simple objective information giving neglects the
importance of meaning co-creation (Botan and Taylor, 2004) about the organization and its
activities. Within the Chinese context, a series of scandals from high-profile nonprofits such
as the China Red Cross and the China Charity Foundation have triggered a public credibility
crisis for the entire third sector (Deng et al., 2015). The importance of cultivating shared
sense-making, verifying successes and demonstrating responsiveness to the legitimacy
concerns of followers thus should not be understated.
In addition to using retweets with comments as a technical feature, these two
organizations also feature conscious efforts to cultivate relationships with followers during
the interactive process. As Lovejoy and Saxton (2012) noted, acknowledging and thanking
donors and other supporters is one of the basic tenets of nonprofit management. In the
present investigation, not only did the organizations express gratitude, but also made
efforts to individualize their appreciation by speaking the language of their donors and
other supporters. Also, in line with the discovery of the relational benefits of developing a
personal voice on corporate blogs (Kelleher and Miller, 2006), this study found that in
microblogging, having a playful organizational personality that includes nicknames and
visuals also serves the purpose of relationship building and relationship sustaining. By
addressing donors and beneficiaries as relatives, such as uncles and aunties, as if the
nonprofits were real people, the distance between those who help and those who are helped
is reduced. Arguably, their strong emphasis on interactivity coupled with tactics to cultivate
relationships is what distinguishes their social media communication the most from other
Chinese nonprofits whose social media use is largely one-way information giving (Gao, 2016;
Zhou and Pan, 2016). The lack of interactive, relationship-oriented communication might be
an important reason why most Chinese nonprofits with active social media accounts were
not able to secure legitimacy and other managerial successes as FLFC and LSP did.
Also, in pursuing social movements without enjoying institutional independence, these
hybrid net-roots third-sector organizations must exercise caution when contesting issues
related to government duties, since options like discrediting the opposition and
confrontation (Bowers and Ochs, 1971) might lead nowhere or even jeopardize the
organization. When taking issue stances not supported by the government, advocacy in the
forms of lobbying or protest generally are not productive in China; the prevailing political
climate necessitates more delicate and indirect tactics. For example, LSP emphasizes the
pains of pneumoconiosis patients and their families as innocent victims through an
engaging storytelling tactic. However, it never criticized victimizers that allowed the disease
to threaten so many lives and create the “one of the most essential social issue facing China”
in this century (Gleiss, 2015; Love Save Pneumoconiosis, n.d.). Instead, they tended to
depoliticize themselves as activists and focus more on providing concrete services and
finding solutions. Adopting playful personalities as organizational identities and using
storytelling also helped to tone down the political dimensions implicated in their causes.
CCIJ Apart from being indirect and delicate, FLFC and LSP also harnessed the potential of
24,1 social network sites to reach and motivate a large audience by encouraging “micro
supports” among its followers. For instance, FLFC encouraged a range of supportive
behaviors: 3 Yuan (less than a half dollar) would bring a happy lunch to one hungry kid; for
LSP, 1 Yuan would extend a patient’s life by five more hours; and even to retweet would be
acknowledged as efforts to rescue patients (Love Save Pneumoconiosis, 2012). Mobilizing
156 messages as such not only generate financial support to sustain the organizations’ service
role, but also contribute to their advocacy role, as micro actions on social media also could be
considered a form of petition and democracy. In other words, social media with its wide
reach might compensate for the absence of political contestations in China (Gleiss, 2015).
The existing frameworks (e.g. Lovejoy and Saxton, 2012) developed from other contexts
thus were not adequate to capture the strategies and tactics identified in this study that
largely account for the two organizations’ successes use during their initial stages.

Conclusion
This study contributes to theory building on nonprofits’ social media communication in the
Chinese context by inductively deriving strategic communication practices of two
successful hybrid net-roots organizations. By examining strategies and tactics that
preceded the formal recognition of the organizations, this research provides a foundation for
future investigations into how Weibo and other social media platforms can be used to
develop multi-purpose hybrid organizations that reflect aspects of civil society, social
movements and traditional nonprofits (Hasenfeld and Gidron, 2005).
In line with the neo-institutional approach, this research was sensitive to the government’s
predominate relationship with nonprofits. By focusing on the developmental period prior to
formal recognition by the government, the researcher suggested that the strategies used by
the successful organizations might make a difference in governmental acceptance of the net-
roots organizations. This approach complicates our thinking about net-roots organizations by
suggesting the successes may be contingent upon patterns of communication strategies and
tactics at particular points in time. How do the communication strategies of newly formed
net-roots organizations compare to those of more established organizations? Can
communication strategies account for recognition by the Chinese Central Government?
Would the roles of communication vary in a process of institutionalization, with more
communication effort made at the beginning and less at the end (Frandsen and Johansen,
2013). Existing studies do not theorize about the importance of particular strategic
communication within specific organizational developmental stages. The decision to focus on
the formative growth of successful organizations was based on the assumption that some net-
roots organizations “make it” and others do not, and that examining the early development of
successful organizations could contribute to practice-focused literature.
For future studies, surveys and interviews could be conducted to assess how the
organizations’ leadership perceives the effectiveness of strategies and tactics, so that more
“best practices” insights could be obtained for practitioners. Although full understanding of
the tipping points that prompt formal supplementary or complementary government–
nonprofit relationships may not be possible considering Chinese government’s complicated
supervision and absolute power over the third sector, pursuing such understanding seems
to be a noble goal.
China is not the only country where the government has gained supremacy over other
sectors. Countries like Singapore (Guo and Zhang, 2014), Japan (Pekkanen, 2003) and
Myanmar (Timothy and Chua, 2017) also experience similar situations where a predominant
state has allowed some space for the third sector with strict scrutiny. The research findings
might contribute to nonprofits’ strategic communication in other institutional contexts with
similar challenges arising from asymmetrical government–nonprofit relationships.
For example, advocacy organizations could pursue social movements indirectly and provide Chinese net-roots
tangible service alongside their advocacy roles. In this way, they are more likely to develop a third-sector
supplementary relation with the government rather than being trapped in an adversarial organizations
relationship (Young, 2000) that usually terminates their roles in supporting the causes.
In addition, the social media strategies and tactics used by these hybrid net-roots
organizations hold promise for addressing common drawbacks innate to third-sector
organizations across countries. First, such organizations could be encumbered by resource 157
insufficiency and excessive amateurism, since many of them rely heavily on voluntary input
and charitable support that are not sufficient or reliable to achieve collective goods
(Gronbjerg, 1994; Salamon et al., 2000). Yet in this study, both organizations were able to
overcome such drawbacks by communicatively cultivating relationships with the publics
and mobilizing them into actions, such as crowdsourcing and online donation.
Second, third-sector organizations might suffer from paternalism issues. Their
beneficiaries might be forced to accept religious, moral or political convictions when they
have no other alternatives but to rely on the services provided by the nonprofits (Salamon
et al., 2000). Yet, if a third-sector organization actively engages in sincere interaction with its
beneficiaries on social media, it might be more attentive to their voices and thus more
cautious against possible paternal tendencies.
Last but not the least, the third sector’s accountability mechanisms are not as effective as
in the cases of for-profit entities who are held accountable by its consumers, board members
and shareholders (Fleishman, 1999; Herzlinger, 1996; Salamon et al., 2000). Nonprofits’ main
vehicle for accountability is the trustworthiness of agency managers. Yet there are many
ways in which organizational operations can unduly benefit nonprofit managers, and board
oversight and supervision tend to be less vigorous as board members have fewer incentives
to do so in comparison to the for-profit sector (Salamon et al., 2000). However, the present
study suggests that social media could be an effective control mechanism, as both
organizations managed to interact with different stakeholders to establish and increase their
accountability via social media. Via strategic social media communication, organizations
can take active roles to “interpret(ed) and reformate(d) the institutions they ‘receive’ making
interventions in accordance with their own local organizational context” (Frandsen and
Johansen, 2013, p. 209). The interactive potential of social media may change the dynamic of
an asymmetrical state-nonprofit relationship and enable nonprofits to achieve legitimacy,
accountability and operational successes in this increasingly connected world.

References
Andrews, K.T. and Edwards, B. (2004), “Advocacy organizations in the US political process”, Annual
Review of Sociology, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 479-506, available at: www.jstor.org/stable/29737703
Anheier, H. and Seibel, W. (Eds) (1990), The Third Sector: Comparative Studies of Nonprofit
Organizations, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Anheier, H.K. and Salamon, L. (2006), “The nonprofit sector in comparative perspective”, in Powell, W.W.
and Steinberg, R. (Eds), Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook, 2nd ed., Yale University Press,
New Haven, CT, pp. 89-116.
Bai, H. (2011), “For the first time, more than a hundred kids in Guizhou Province had lunch”, China
Youth (Zhongguo Qingnian Bao), p. 3, available at: http://zqb.cyol.com/html/2011-04/02/nw.
D110000zgqnb_20110402_4-03.htm (accessed 20 August 2016).
Boeije, H. (2002), “A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative
interviews”, Quality & Quantity, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 391-409, doi: 10.1023/a:1020909529486.
Bortree, D.S. and Seltzer, T. (2009), “Dialogic strategies and outcomes: an analysis of environmental
advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 317-319,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.002
CCIJ Botan, C.H. and Taylor, M. (2004), “Public relations: state of the field”, Journal of Communication,
24,1 Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 645-661, available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02649.x
Bowers, J. and Ochs, D.J. (1971), The Rhetoric of Agitation and Control, Addison-Wesley, New York, NY.
Brown, T. (2014), “Negotiating the NGO/social movement dichotomy: evidence from Punjab, India”,
VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 46-66, doi: 10.1007/s11266-012-9324-7.
158 Deephouse, D.L. and Suchman, M. (2008), “Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism”, in
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Lawrence, T.B. and Meyer, R.E. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of
Organizational Institutionalism, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 49-77.
Deng, F. (2014), “Free Lunch’s icebreaking journey in Xinhuang”, Digest of Chinese and Foreign Books
(Zhong Wai Shu Zhai), Vol. 6, pp. 39-42.
Deng, G. (2010), “The hidden rules governing China’s unregistered NGOs: management and consequences”,
China Review, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 183-206, available at: www.jstor.org/stable/23462247
Deng, G., Lu, S. and Huang, C.C. (2015), “Transparency of grassroots human service organizations in China:
does transparency affect donation and grants?”, Human Service Organizations: Management,
Leadership & Governance, Vol. 39 No. 5, pp. 475-491, doi: 10.1080/23303131.2015.1076751.
Donahue, J., Eggleston, K., Jing, Y. and Zeckhauser, R. (2013), “Collaborative governance in China and
the United States: theory and practice”, paper presented at Collaboration among Government,
Market and Society: Forging Partnerships and Encouraging Competition, Shanghai, available
at: www.umdcipe.org/conferences/GovernmentCollaborationShanghai/Submitted_Papers/
Donahu_Eggleston_Jing_Paper.pdf (accessed 20 August 2016).
Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J. (1975), “Organizational legitimacy: social values and organizational
behavior”, Pacific Sociological Review, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 122-136, doi: 10.2307/1388226.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550, available at: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4308385
Fang, T. (2011), “Change China with actions: interview with Fei Deng, founder of Free Lunch for
Children”, Tiyu Jiankang Zhishi Huakan (Pictorial of Physical Education and Health), Vol. 2
No. 14, pp. 58-63.
Fleishman, J. (1999), “Public trust in not-for-profit organizations and the need for regulatory reform”, in
Clotfelter, C.T. and Ehrlich, T. (Eds), Philanthropy and the Nonprofit Sector in a Changing
America, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN and Indianapolis, IN, pp. 172-192.
Fram, S.M. (2013), “The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory”, The
Qualitative Report, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-25.
Frandsen, F. and Johansen, W. (2013), “Public relations and the new institutionalism: in search of a
theoretical framework”, Public Relations Inquiry, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 205-221, doi: 10.1177/
2046147x13485353.
Fredriksson, M. and Pallas, J. (2015), “Strategic communication as institutional work”, in Holtzhausen, D.
and Zerfass, A. (Eds), The Routledge Handbook of Strategic Communication, Routledge, New York,
NY, pp. 143-156.
Free Lunch for Children (2011), “Local volunteer @Zhijinlihongqiao found out that the prices posted by
Yanning from @Zhijinzhongshan primary school were lower than the prices she found at
grocery stores mainly because (Yaning) purchased at a wholesale market before down and paid
for the transportation fee with his own money, about 100 RMB”, (Sina Weibo Tweet), available
at: https://weibo.com/2058877932/eDCFDVbelQ4?ref=collection&type=comment (accessed 20
August 2016).
Free Lunch for Children (nd), “Information disclosure”, available at: www.mianfeiwucan.org/en/school/
schoolinfo/ (accessed 20 August 2016).
Gao, F. (2016), “Social media as a communication strategy: content analysis of top nonprofit
foundations’ micro-blogs in China”, International Journal of Strategic Communication, Vol. 10
No. 4, pp. 225-271, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2016.1196693
Gidron, B., Katz, S.N. and Hasenfeld, Y. (2002), Mobilizing for Peace: Conflict Resolution in Northern Chinese net-roots
Ireland, Israel/Palestine, and South Africa, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. third-sector
Gidron, B., Kramer, R.M. and Salamon, L.M. (1992), Government and the Third Sector: Emerging organizations
Relationships in Welfare States, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies of Qualitative Research,
Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, IL.
Gleiss, M.S. (2015), “Speaking up for the suffering (br)other: Weibo activism, discursive struggles, and 159
minimal politics in China”, Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 513-529, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443714566897
Gronbjerg, K. (1994), Understanding Nonprofit Funding, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Grunig, J.E. and Hunt, T. (1984), Managing Public Relations, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, NY.
Guo, C. and Saxton, G.D. (2014), “Tweeting social change: how social media are changing nonprofit
advocacy”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 57-79, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764012471585
Guo, C. and Zhang, Z. (2013), “Mapping the representational dimensions of non-profit organizations in
China”, Public Administration, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 325-346, available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.
1467-9299.2011.01994.x
Guo, C. and Zhang, Z. (2014), “Understanding nonprofit advocacy in non-western settings: a framework
and empirical evidence from Singapore”, VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and
Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 1151-1174, doi: 10.1007/s11266-014-9468-8.
Hasenfeld, Y. and Gidron, B. (2005), “Understanding multi-purpose hybrid voluntary organizations: the
contributions of theories on civil society, social movements and non-profit organizations”, Journal
of Civil Society, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 97-112, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17448680500337350
Herzlinger, R. (1996), “Can public trust nonprofits and governments be restored?”, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 74 No. 2, pp. 97-107.
Ho, P. and Edmonds, R. (Eds) (2007), China’s Embedded Activism: Opportunities and Constraints of a
Social Movement, Routledge, New York, NY.
Howard, P.N. and Hussain, M.M. (2011), “The role of digital media”, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 35-48, doi: 10.1353/jod.2011.0041.
Jensen, R.J. (2006), “Analyzing social movement rhetoric”, Rhetoric Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 372-375,
available at: www.jstor.org/stable/20176741
Jing, Y. (2015), “Between control and empowerment: governmental strategies towards the development
of the non-profit sector in China”, Asian Studies Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 589-608, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2015.1090394
Jing, Y. and Chen, B. (2012), “Is competitive contracting really competitive? Exploring
government–nonprofit collaboration in China”, International Public Management Journal,
Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 405-428, doi: 10.1080/10967494.2012.761054.
Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010), “Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
social media”, Business Horizons, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 59-68, available at: https://pdfs.
semanticscholar.org/682c/434becc69b9dc70a4c18305f9d733d03f581.pdf
Kelleher, T. and Miller, B.M. (2006), “Organizational blogs and the human voice: relational strategies and
relational outcomes”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 395-414,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00019.x
Long, Z. (2016), “Managing legitimacy crisis for state-owned non-profit organization: a case study of
the Red Cross Society of China”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 372-374, available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2015.09.011
Love Save Pneumoconiosis (2012), “To retweet is to rescue; and communication generates power. Weibo is
key to raising awareness on pneumoconiosis. We’d like more retweets from you all! Please support
us! ”, Weibo Tweet, available at: https://weibo.com/2154411657/z8YEfrwaB?from=page_1006062
154411657_profile&wvr=6&mod=weibotime&type=comment (accessed 20 August 2016).
CCIJ Love Save Pneumoconiosis (2017), “Memorabilia”, available at: www.daaiqingchen.org/bencandy.php?
24,1 fid=15&id=3315 (accessed 10 June 2018).
Love Save Pneumoconiosis (n.d.), “About us”, available at: www.daaiqingchen.org/list.php?fid=49
(accessed 20 August 2016).
Lovejoy, K. and Saxton, G.D. (2012), “Information, community, and action: how nonprofit organizations
use social media”, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 337-353,
160 available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x
McMillan, S.J., Hoy, M.G., Kim, J. and McMahan, C. (2008), “A multifaceted tool for a complex
phenomenon: coding web‐based interactivity as technologies for interaction evolve”, Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 794-826, doi: 10.1111/j.1083-
6101.2008.00420.x.
McPherson, E. (2015), “Advocacy organizations’ evaluation of social media information for NGO
journalism the evidence and engagement models”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 59 No. 1,
pp. 124-148, available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214540508
Mansfield, H. (2014), Mobile for Good, McGraw-Hill Education, New York, NY.
Marquis, C., Zhou, Y. and Yang, Z. (2016), “The emergence of subversive charities in China”, Stanford
Social Innovation Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 42-47.
Men, L.R. and Tsai, W.S. (2012), “How companies cultivate relationships with publics on social network
sites: evidence from China and the United States”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 5,
pp. 723-730, available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.10.006
Minkoff, D.C. (2002), “The emergence of hybrid organizational forms: combining identity-based service
provision and political action”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 377-
401, doi: 10.1177/0899764002313004.
Obar, J.A., Zube, P. and Lampe, C. (2012), “Advocacy 2.0: an analysis of how advocacy groups in the
United States perceive and use social media as tools for facilitating civic engagement and
collective action”, Journal of Information Policy, Vol. 2, pp. 1-25, doi: 10.5325/
jinfopoli.2.2012.0001.
Oliver, C. (1991), “Strategic responses to institutional processes”, Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 145-179, doi: 10.5465/amr.1991.4279002.
Pekkanen, R. (2003), “Molding Japanese civil society: state structured incentives and the patterning of
civil society”, in Schwartz, F.J. and Pharr, S.J. (Eds), The State of Civil Society in Japan,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 175-204.
Petray, T.L. (2011), “Protest 2.0: online interactions and aboriginal activists”, Media, Culture & Society,
Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 923-940, available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443711411009
Poell, T., De Kloet, J. and Zeng, G. (2014), “Will the real Weibo please stand up? Chinese online
contention and actor-network theory”, Chinese Journal of Communication, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-18,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2013.816753
Read, B.L. (2007), “Assessing variation in civil society organizations: China’s homeowner associations
in comparative perspective”, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 1240-1265, available
at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414007302340
Ru, J. and Ortolano, L. (2007), “Corporatist control of environmental non-governmental organizations”,
in Ho, P. and Edmonds, R. (Eds), China’s Embedded Activism: Opportunities and Constraints of a
Social Movement, Routledge, NY, pp. 44-68.
Salamon, L.M., Hems, L.C. and Chinnock, K. (2000), “The nonprofit sector: for what and for whom?”,
Working Papers of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project No. 37, The Johns
Hopkins Center for Civil Society Studies, Baltimore, MD.
Saxton, G.D. and Waters, R.D. (2014), “What do stakeholders like on Facebook? Examining public
reactions to nonprofit organizations’ informational, promotional, and community-building
messages”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 280-299, available at: https://
doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2014.908721
Schmidt, J.J. (2013), “The rhetoric of agitation and control: impact in scholarly works”, Poroi, Vol. 9 Chinese net-roots
No. 2, pp. 2-11, doi: 10.13008/2151-2957.1170. third-sector
Scott, W.R. (2008), Institutions and Organizations: Ideas and Interests, Sage, Los Angeles, CA. organizations
Singh, J.V., Tucker, D.J. and House, R.J. (1986), “Organizational legitimacy and the liability of newness”,
Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 171-193, doi: 10.2307/2392787.
Stewart, C.J. (1980), “A functional approach to the rhetoric of social movements”, Communication
Studies, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 298-305, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978009368070 161
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998), Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage, Los Angeles, CA.
Timothy, H. and Chua, L. (2017), “Negotiating in/visibility: the political economy of lesbian activism and
rights advocacy”, Development and Change, Vol. 48 No. 4, pp. 639-662, doi: 10.1111/dech.12314.
Vraga, E.K., Bode, L., Wells, C., Driscoll, K. and Thorson, K. (2014), “The rules of engagement:
comparing two social protest movements on YouTube”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 133-140, available at: https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0117
Wang, K. (2015), “Promoting mass communication with micro forces: a case study on Love Save
Pneumoconiosis”, Society and Nonprofits (Shehui Yu Gongyi), Vol. 5 No. 8, pp. 44-47.
Xinhua News (2018), “Love Save Pneumoconiosis issued 2017 annual report”, available at: www.
xinhuanet.com/gongyi/2018-02/12/c_129811471.htm (accessed 26 July 2018).
Young, D.R. (2000), “Alternative models of government-nonprofit sector relations: theoretical and
international perspectives”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 149-172,
available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764000291009
Zhou, H. and Pan, Q. (2016), “Information, community, and action on Sina Weibo: how Chinese
philanthropic NGOs use social media”, VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and
Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 2433-2457, available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s112
66-016-9685-4
Zucker, L.G. (1987), “Institutional theories of organization”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 13 No. 1,
pp. 443-464.

Further reading
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (2000), “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and
collective rationality in organizational fields”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 2,
pp. 147-160.
Lan, G.Z. and Galaskiewicz, J. (2012), “Innovations in public and non-profit sector organizations in
China”, Management and Organization Review, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 491-506, available at: https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2012.00311.x

Corresponding author
Feifei Chen can be contacted at: gracechanfeifei@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

CCIJ
24,1
162
Received 23 October 2018
Revised 30 October 2018
Accepted 30 October 2018
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal
Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 162-178
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-10-2018-0108
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
When is silence golden?
The use of strategic silence in
crisis communication
Phuong D. Le and Hui Xun Teo
Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Augustine Pang
Lee Kong Chian School of Business,
Singapore Management University, Singapore, and
Yuling Li and Cai-Qin Goh
Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Abstract
Purpose – Scholars have discouraged using silence in crises as it magnifies the information vacuum
(see Pang, 2013). The purpose of this paper is to argue for its viability and explore the type of silence that
can be used.
Design/methodology/approach – Eight international cases were analyzed to examine how silence was
adopted, sustained and broken.
Findings – The findings uncovered three intention-based typologies of strategic silence: delaying, avoiding
and hiding silences. Among such, avoiding/hiding silence intensified crises and adversely affected post-
silence organizational image when forcefully broken, while delaying silence helped preserve/restore image
with primary stakeholders if successfully sustained and broken as planned.
Research limitations/implications – First, these findings may lack generalizability due to the limited
number of cases studied. Second, local sentiments may not be fully represented in the English-language news
examined as they may be written for a different audience. Finally, a number of cases studied were still
ongoing at the time of writing, so the overall effectiveness of the strategy employed might be compromised as
future events unfold.
Practical implications – A stage-based practical guide to adopting delaying silence is proposed as a
supporting strategy before the execution of crisis response strategies.
Originality/value – This is one of the few studies to examine the role of silence in crisis communication as
silence is not recognized as a type of response in dominant crisis theories – be it the situational crisis
communication theory or the image repair theory (An and Cheng, 2010; Benoit, 2015; Benoit and Pang, 2008;
Xu and Li, 2013).
Keywords Media, Leadership, Corporate communications, Crisis, Crisis management
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
When crises occur, people demand answers. Stakeholders seek them in the media, which in
turn fuels the demand for information, generating an information vacuum (Pang, 2013).
Scholars underscore the need for organizations to actively communicate and fill the
information vacuum, failing which the space may be filled with speculation and
misinformation and cause the crisis to escalate (Pang, 2013). As such, the common
assumption is that a crisis response is necessary and desirable, and that organizations
should not stay silent during a crisis. However, in reality, organizations sometimes opt to
stay quiet during a crisis (Claeys and Opgenhaffen, 2016). There is thus a theoretical gap to
be addressed, since little has been studied on silence and the effectiveness of silence as a
crisis management strategy.
 The present investigation aims to address this gap by examining eight international Strategic
crises where silence was strategically adopted by organizations and whether the strategy silence in crisis
worked. Theoretically, this study presents new perspectives that support the strategic use communication
of silence in managing crises and explores a systematic approach in categorizing its uses.
Managerially, it provides practical guidance on when and how to strategically adopt and
break silence during a crisis.
163
Literature review
Defining strategic silence
Silence – defined as “a lack of communication from an organization or its failure to provide
clear and adequate responses to questions or concerns raised” (Woon and Pang, 2017, p. 335) –
can be used intentionally or unintentionally. For the purpose of this paper, a clear distinction
between intentional and unintentional silence must be made. Penuel et al. (2013) termed
unintentional silence as “natural silence”; Woon and Pang (2017) further identified it as
stemming from unfavorable situations that prevent an organization from quickly acquiring
and disseminating critical information to stakeholders. In essence, natural silence occurs when
the organization has no other choice but to remain silent. By contrast, strategic silence – the
focus of this study – is a deliberate decision.
In political discourse, Brummett (1980) defined strategic silence as a public figure’s
intentional refusal to communicate verbally, violating expectations, with the public
assigning predictable meanings to it, while Dimitrov (2015) referred to strategic silence not
only as the absence of speech but also as statements providing little to no information.
Strategic silence should then be operationally defined as a deliberate lack of organizational
communication, and if there is any, the information is intentionally scant and ambiguous.

Silence viewed as undesirable

During a crisis, stakeholders demand answers, and when they are met with silence, an
information vacuum is birthed, which may escalate or reawaken in an enlarged second crisis,
resulting in speculation, frustration and loss of trust among stakeholders (Woon and Pang,
2017). As such, scholars have recommended that organizations employ proactive crisis
management strategies like “stealing thunder” (Coombs, 2015a, p. 146) to break news
about the crisis before the media does to reduce reputational damage (Claeys and Cauberghe,
2012; Woon and Pang, 2017). In handling challenges, organizations may adopt
strategic silence as its “refusal strategy” to ignore the challenger, but Coombs and
Holladay (2015) highlighted this as risky because it allows the challenger to frame the
situation. In journalistic discourse, silence “often insinuates culpability and guilt by default”
(Dimitrov, 2015, p. 638); and in organizations, silence from management might be interpreted
as “negligence, indifference, an index of a weak position, or a validation of rumors”
( Johannesen, 1974, p. 30). Hearit (1994) highlighted the benefits of issuing an apologia early in
a corporate crisis to deprive the media of a continuing story and restrain reputational
damages, critiquing silence as “an admission of guilt” (p. 114). Without an apology or denial
response, Ferrin et al. (2007) found the use of silence to be suboptimal in managing different
types of trust violations for it neither clarifies guilt nor offers redemption.
Due to its passive nature, silence is not recognized as a type of response in prominent
crisis response frameworks. The two dominant crisis theories – Coombs’ situational crisis
communication theory (SCCT) and Benoit’s image repair theory (IRT) (An and Cheng, 2010;
Benoit, 2015; Benoit and Pang, 2008; Xu and Li, 2013) – do not consider silence as a
strategy. SCCT argues that communicating information is the first priority, followed by the
adoption of response strategies. Similarly, IRT recommended proactive strategies in
managing an organization’s image during a crisis, and therefore excluded silence from the
list of response options.
CCIJ Where strategic silence might work
24,1 Despite the fact that strategic silence in crisis has been practiced by organizations
worldwide, under federal investigations, religious ministries in the USA employed strategic
silence (Swanson, 2012); in a survey in Croatia, 16.3 percent of practitioners chose to remain
silent while facing a crisis ( Jugo, 2017); in Hong Kong, silence was found to be commonly
practiced by corporations during organizational crises (Lee, 2000, as cited in Lee, 2004).
164 It has been suggested that strategic silence can be viable, albeit circumstantially.
It might be practiced when there are legal implications to speaking out or when
information on hand is insufficient (Claeys and Opgenhaffen, 2016). Regulators might use
strategic silence to signal confidence in position when faced with criticism in areas where
they have a strong reputation (Maor et al., 2012). Politicians could use it to dodge
commitments or conflicts ( Johannesen, 1974, p. 32). Notably, Smith (2013) suggested
that strategic silence can be used to signal patience, composure with noble intentions
(e.g. sympathy or respect for privacy) or to avoid sidetracking while the issue is being
worked on. This strategy, however, only works when the organization is trusted by
stakeholders; no “no comment” statement, which often implies guilt, is made; and a
statement of justification is issued (Smith, 2013).
Dimitrov (2015) introduced four types of silences in public relations: absolute, defensive,
preserving and anticipating. Absolute silence was highlighted as a riskier option as it is
infinite and works best to avoid an overreaction in response to crises, which requires sound
judgment. The other three types involve some form of calculated response, serving to either
evade the real issue (defensive), cascade the information to a platform of lower visibility
(preserving) or to flag worst-case scenarios ahead of time (anticipating) (Dimitrov, 2015).
While the above treatments of strategic silence overlap in their focus on its intentionality,
organizational intentions behind the strategy are not spelled out and distinguished clearly.
The authors of this paper recognize the need for a more systematic approach that examines
such intentions and the corresponding strategies. As crisis literature on silence is limited,
research was drawn from the field of linguistics, which has studied the subject in greater depth.

Organizational intentions of strategic silence

Jensen (1973), a linguistics researcher, listed five interpersonal communication functions of
silence, which may apply in the positive or negative sense: linkage function – to bond people
or separate them; affecting function – to heal or hurt; revelation function – to reveal or hide
information from others; judgmental function – to signal assent/favor or dissent/disfavor;
and activating function – to signal deep thoughtfulness or mental inactivity. Extending this
theory to corporate communication, and specifically crisis communication, it is possible that
organizations/leaders may strategically use silence for similar functions. The authors
propose to transpose such into the corporate context (see Table I).
When evaluating Dimitrov’s (2015) four types of silence, an overlap appears in the five
functions listed above, with absolute silence reflecting the linkage function (in this instance,
avoiding), defensive and preserving silence indicating revelation (revealing and hiding,
respectively), and anticipating silence demonstrating activation (work-in-progress).

Silence function Organizational intention in crisis management

Linkage (+) Bond with stakeholders (−) Avoid stakeholders/issues

Table I. Affecting (+) Heal stakeholders (−) Wound stakeholders
Proposed functions of Revelation (+) Reveal information (−) Hide information
strategic silence in Judgment (+) Signal approval (−) Signal disapproval
crisis management Activation (+) Signal work-in-progress (−) Signal inaction
Factors leading to the adoption of strategic silence Strategic
Besides organizational intentions, other external factors, namely the crisis situation and the silence in crisis
local culture, might predispose an organization to adopt silence in managing a crisis. communication
Crisis situation factors. Even though not considered a response strategy in the SCCT
(Coombs, 2008), strategic silence is still used by organizations to manage crises. Such
adoption might then still be influenced by the same crisis situation factors identified in the
SCCT, namely, crisis type, crisis responsibility, crisis severity and the organization’s history 165
of dealing with similar crises (Coombs, 2008).
Cultural context. As most prominent crisis response strategy frameworks have been
developed in the west, they might not fully capture the influence of culture in analyzing
non-western crises (Hu and Pang, 2016). Depending on differing beliefs on how much/little
communication is needed in a given circumstance, different cultures can perceive silence
differently ( Jaworski, 1992). Specifically, Johannesen (1974) suggested that Asian cultures have
a greater tolerance for silence. For instance, in Japan, silence is socio-culturally acceptable and
widely perceived as meaningful (Fujio, 2004). Ye and Pang (2011) noted that Chinese cultural
concepts of “saving face” and “uncertainty avoidance” (p. 260) can shape crisis responses, and
these can manifest in the preference to avoid communication or divert attention (Hu and Pang,
2018). Pang (2013) also noted that the Chinese Government’s first strategy is often to cover up
the crisis until it fades away. Strategic silence may thus be more commonly adopted in such
Asian contexts. In other words, culture can be a predisposing factor in forming a crisis
management strategy as described in the contingency theory (Pang et al., 2010).
The first research question thus looks at the organizational intentions, crisis situation
and cultural context when it comes to the adoption of silence:
RQ1. Under what circumstances do organizations keep silent in crises?

Strategic silence as a crisis intensifier

The second research question examines what happens during the silence. Studies have
argued for the criticality of responding as quickly as possible during crisis. A quick
response helps the organization reassert organizational control and credibility (Augustine,
1995). A slow response, on the contrary, connotes incompetence (Donath, 1984). Woon and
Pang (2017) suggested that an organization’s silence during an information vacuum
“provokes a response intensified by public dissatisfaction and media glare” (p. 331). This
can be further escalated by media and social media hype, where issues gain traction in
both legacy and new media (Woon and Pang, 2017) through created and shared content.
Without a message framed by the organization, the silence would be open to interpretation
by their stakeholders. As stakeholders might have conflicting interests and dissension on
certain issues (Coombs and Holladay, 2015), the silence might also produce different, even
contrasting, effects on different stakeholders. It is therefore meaningful to examine
whether silence worsens the information vacuum in all cases, particularly in relation to
stakeholders’ perceptions of the organization:
RQ2. How does the organization’s silence intensify the crisis?

The breaking of strategic silence

An organization might plan to break silence at a certain time, or maintain it by remaining
silent until the crisis is over. In either instance, circumstances may arise which could affect
the organization’s plan.
Situational factors. During a crisis, new events might unfold or new information might
become available. Situational factors may cause an organization to change its position. The
CCIJ contingency theory of strategic conflict management termed it as stance movement, and that
24,1 situational factors can be powerful enough to change the predisposing positioned stance on
the continuum of advocacy and accommodation (Pang et al., 2010). For example, the crisis
severity might be heightened or stakeholders might gain more salience, prompting the
organization to reevaluate its current stance (Coombs and Holladay, 2015), i.e. breaking the
silence prematurely and/or adopting a new response strategy.
166 Crisis response strategy. It is worth examining how an organization breaks its silence
through the type of response strategy employed. This might be part of the organization’s plan
prior to the adoption of silence, or the result of situational factors, such as when an
organization is compelled to break its silence due to pressure from stakeholders. According to
the SCCT (Coombs, 2008), ten common response strategies can be categorized into three
postures based on their communicative goals: deny (attack the accuser, denial and scapegoat),
diminish (excuse and justification) and deal (ingratiation, concern, compensation, regret and
apology). This study thus examines the circumstances surrounding the breaking of silence:
RQ3a. What leads the organization to break its silence?
RQ3b. How does the organization break the silence?

The effects of strategic silence

Since crisis management aims to “restore organizational normalcy and influence public
perception” (Pang, 2012, p. 359), the last research question assesses the overall effectiveness
of silence as a strategy by examining an organization’s post-silence image. This can be
analyzed along the four dimensions of organizational image as identified by Van Riel and
Fombrun (2007): product, social, financial and recruitment:
RQ4. How is an organization’s image affected after the silence is broken?

Method
Case studies are conducted to empirically investigate this “contemporary phenomenon
within some real-life context” (Yin, 1984, p. 13) to explore a “situation in which the
boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident” (Yin, 1993, as cited by
Pang et al., 2014, p. 104). Since prior research on intentional/strategic silence is limited, this
exploratory study employs the multiple-case study approach explained in Wan et al. (2015)
and Woon and Pang (2017), where detailed documentation of organizational and social
processes facilitate the answering of research questions. Case studies, as argued by Stake
(1998), explore the phenomenon the researcher is interested to explore, and the exploration
leads to the illumination of insights that contribute to theory building.

Case selection
Eight international crises where the organizations/leaders kept silent were identified with
the following criteria: it was evident that the silence was planned or intentional; cases were
sourced from different countries to provide diversity; and to lend currency and relevance,
they occurred within five years prior to the study (2012–2017). For full listing of the cases,
please see Table II.

Data collection
For each case, data were collected from news reports from Factiva and Google search; and
official content (press releases and other documents) published online by the organization/
leader involved. Sources were restricted to publications in English. In light of differing
cultural interpretations of silence, local news sources as well as international ones were

Crisis descriptions (Year, country)
Violence broke out in Myanmar’s Rakhine State on
August 25, 2017, resulting in more than 100 deaths
and 400,000 mostly Rohingya refugees fleeing
Rakhine as of October 2017 (2017, Myanmar)
Dire farming conditions caused growing suicide
rates in India yearly since 2005. From March to
April 2017, farmers from Tamil Nadu held
protests in New Delhi (2017, India)
April 2016 saw a massive coastal marine
pollution in four central provinces of Vietnam,
caused by Formosa Ha Tinh Steel’s illegal
discharge of 300 tons of toxic industrial waste
(2016, Vietnam)
Phones were found defective with overheating
issues in August 2016. Replacement devices also
caught fire or exploded, resulting in a global
recall (2016, International)
In April 2015, the nationwide issuance of
children’s vaccines was compromised when a
pharmacist was arrested for distributing
expired vaccines to healthcare agencies
across China (2015–2016, China)
Between April and June 2015, 25 patients
and seven deaths at Organization 5 were
linked to a hepatitis C virus within its
premises (2015, Singapore)
On July 18, 2013, Organization 6 developer site
was hacked. The site was taken down and a
maintenance notice was put up. No further
information was shared until three days later
(2013, International)
In September 2012, Organization 7 faced a
bacterial contamination in its meat-packing
plant, 10 cases of poisoning and a nationwide
tainted-beef recall (2012, Canada)
Silence
Strategic
Use of strategic silence (Organization/Leader) duration silence in crisis
communication
Myanmar’s de facto leader remained silent 3 weeks
on the issue for more than three weeks,
issuing her first public address on
September 19, 2017 (Leader 1)
Organization 1 stayed mute on the 40 days 167
situation for 40 days of the protest
and took no action (Organization 1)
Organization 2 attempted to protect 3
Formosa as a major foreign investor by months
withholding information for nearly
three months (Organization 2)
Initially, Organization 3 provided little 4
information. After the recall, it kept mostly silent months
for 6.5 months after announcing intentions to
focus on investigations (Organization 3)
Organization 4 chose to bury the scandal for 1 year
almost a year. The news was only made
known to the public on March 2016
(Organization 4)
Organization 5 waited for four months 4
before announcing its suspicion of months
the cause of infection (Organization 5)
Organization 6 remained silent while 3 days
working to resolve the issue. On July 21, 2013,
Organization 6 notified app developers of the
security breach and the corrective action taken
(Organization 6)
Organization 7 failed to offer an explanation or 3 weeks
address the issue publicly for three weeks after
the outbreak (Organization 7) Table II.
Case descriptions

studied to examine the perceptions of various stakeholders. The duration was limited to a
day prior to news breaking of the crisis to two months after the silence-breaking point.
Please refer to Table III for data sources and duration.

Data analysis
This study employs Glaser and Strauss’ (1967) constant comparative approach to
inductively analyze data in four stages: comparing the incidents in each case; integrating the
categories; delimiting the theory; and writing the theory. First, data were examined on how
silence was adopted, sustained and broken. The cases were subsequently classified
according to the intended usage of silence, and whether the breaking of silence was forced
on or initiated by the organization/leader.
Next, the cases were analyzed based on the effects on organizational image during and
after the silence. This was determined along Van Riel and Fombrun’s (2007) four dimensions
of social image, financial image, product image and recruitment image.
CCIJ Case Sources Duration of collection
24,1
Leader 1 News sources, e.g. The Guardian, CNN, January 10, 2016–October 26, 2017
The Irrawaddy, New York Times
Organization 1 News sources, e.g. The Citizen, The Hindu, April 13, 2017–September 18, 2017
International Business Times
Organization 2 News sources, e.g. Asia Times, Reuters, April 27, 2016–September 10, 2017
168 New York Times, Channel News Asia
Organization 3 News sources, e.g. Forbes, Wall Street Journal, September 15, 2016–March 29, 2017
Bloomberg, Reuters
Technology-focused news sites, e.g. Techspot, CNET
Official press releases on Samsung’s website
Organization 4 News sources, e.g. New York Times, Time Magazine, March 26, 2016–April 19, 2017
The Straits Times, South China Morning Post
Organization 5 News sources, e.g. Channel News Asia, October 6, 2015–March 17, 2016
The Straits Times, Today
Organization 6 News sites and sources, e.g. Macworld, July 21, 2013–July 22, 2013
Table III. CNN, Huffington Post
Case news sources Organization 7 News sources, e.g. Canadian Business, September 24, 2012–July 17, 2015
and collection period The Globe and Mail, The Canadian Press

The information was then categorized into blocks of data representing what Glaser and
Strauss (1967) called “local” concepts (p. 45), such as the perceptions of stakeholders during
the silence or information vacuum, the circumstances leading to the breaking of silence, the
response strategies employed by the organization/leader to break the silence and the effects on
their image post-silence. With continuous comparisons of data in each category, additional
categories emerged. Links were then made between local concepts and categories, setting
boundaries for the theory. Finally, a theory explicating strategic silence was constructed.

Findings
The first research question examined an organization/leader’s adoption of silence as a crisis
management strategy by looking at the organizational intentions, crisis situation factors
and cultural context in which the organization operates.

Organizational intentions lead to different types of strategic silence used

Data showed that in all eight cases, silence was intentionally adopted by each organization/
leader with different agendas. Among the ten types of intentions proposed, three were
observed in the cases, namely, avoiding stakeholders/issues, hiding information and signaling
work-in-progress. From these intentions, the authors propose three new typologies of strategic
silence, respectively, avoiding silence, hiding silence and delaying silence (see Table IV ). The
cases are categorized into three groups based on the type of silence used (see Table V ).

Silence function Organizational intention in crisis management

Linkage (+) Bond with stakeholders (−) Avoid stakeholders/issues

Avoiding silence
Affecting (+) Heal stakeholders (−) Wound stakeholders
Table IV. Revelation (+) Reveal information (−) Hide information
Proposed new Hiding silence
typologies for Judgment (+) Signal approval (−) Signal disapproval
strategic silence in Activation (+) Signal work-in-progress (−) Signal inaction
crisis management Delaying silence
Avoiding silence (Organizations 1 and 7). This type of strategic silence does the converse of Strategic
linkage ( Jensen, 1973), separating the organization from stakeholders and/or issues silence in crisis
concerning them. For instance, in India, Organization 1 deliberately kept silent to avoid
succumbing to farmers’ demands of agriculture loan waivers as it faced a shortage in the
communication
state budget.
Hiding silence (Organizations 2 and 4). This type of strategic silence does the converse of
revelation ( Jensen, 1973), that is, to hide or withhold pertinent information from 169
stakeholders indefinitely. For instance, in Vietnam, Organization 2 kept silent for three
months, refusing to disclose an estimate of destruction to marine life and the number of
people falling ill, even withholding details of the toxic chemicals from victims and doctors,
citing the need to restrict coverage during investigation.
Delaying silence (Leader 1, Organizations 3, 5 and 6). This variant of strategic silence
signals activation ( Jensen, 1973). The intention is to communicate work-in-progress, with a
plan to break silence when sufficient information has been gathered and arrangements
made for a formal response. For instance, in Myanmar, in the statement which broke their
three-week silence, Leader 1 invited external observers to witness the problems first-hand in
Rakhine. This suggests that during the period of intentional silence, Leader 1 was
investigating the attacks and preparing for the logistics of the invitation.

Crisis management history might affect adoption of strategic silence

For each case, the study looks into whether crisis type, crisis responsibility, crisis severity
and the organization’s crisis history influenced the adoption of silence. Data showed that in
certain cases (Organizations 1, 4 and 6), if the organization had previously adopted silence to
deal with similar crises, it might do so again. For instance, with Organization 6, the company
had previously employed the same delaying silence approach when there were technical
issues with the antenna of a previous phone model, speaking up only after 22 days with a
press conference to provide updates and corrective action for phone users.

Cultural context might predispose the adoption of strategic silence

This was evident in China where the fear of criticism deeply embedded in Organization 4’s
culture may explain its tendency to obfuscate or withhold vital negative news, which is
consistent with the aforementioned theoretical suggestions (Hu and Pang, 2018; Pang, 2013;
Ye and Pang, 2011).
The second research question examined how did the organization’s silence intensify the
crisis, if it did. This question looks at the changes in relevant stakeholders’ perceptions of
the organization during the period of silence and the information vacuum generated in the
crisis. Based on the data, the effects of silence in the cases are categorized into four groups:
retrospective intensifier, intensifier in the information vacuum, polarizing perceptions and
minimal/no intensification, summarized in Table VI.

Location Organization/Leader Silence type

India Organization 1 Avoiding

Canada Organization 7 Avoiding
Vietnam Organization 2 Hiding
China Organization 4 Hiding
Myanmar Leader 1 Delaying
International Organization 3 Delaying Table V.
Singapore Organization 5 Delaying Case listing based on
International Organization 6 Delaying type of silence used
CCIJ Silence as a retrospective intensifier (Organizations 4 and 5)
24,1 In both cases, the public remained unaware of the crises until information came to light.
The organizations received retrospective criticism and were questioned on the delay in
revealing the news, with stakeholders forming negative perceptions of the silence after
news broke, intensifying the crisis. As such, there was no escalation of the information
vacuum/crisis during the actual silence period, only after. For instance, for Organization 5,
170 the public and opposition political parties questioned the delay in releasing information
and criticized the lack of transparency when investigation had started four months prior to
the news breaking.

Silence as an intensifier in the information vacuum (Organizations 1, 2, 3 and 7)

In these cases, after news of the crises broke, the silence contributed to and escalated the
information vacuum, and was perceived negatively by stakeholders, which aligns with
Woon and Pang’s (2017) theory. For instance, in India, Organization 1’s silent treatment and
indifference toward the farmers’ deaths and demands were heavily criticized by the media
and public, vehemently protested by farmers and reprimanded by the Supreme Court.

Silence producing polarizing perceptions (Leader 1)

While the above cases indicate that silence exacerbates the crisis, the situation is less
apparent with Myanmar. Leader 1’s reticence was perceived both positively and negatively
by different stakeholders. Generally portrayed in the international media as indifferent
toward ethnic cleansing, Leader 1 drew criticism from various foreign observers, including
fellow Nobel laureates. However, Leader 1 also received sympathy from foreign dignitaries,
such as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, and
continued to enjoy unwavering support among their domestic audience, with hundreds of
supporters gathering for the September 19 address. Sympathetic observers justified
the silence as a result of Leader 1’s limited political purview over the Myanmar military,
which still held significant power. The ambiguity created by the silence might have been
strategically planned to give rise to “unchecked inference about one’s motives and actions”,
as theorized by Brummett (1980, pp. 293-294) in analyzing strategic silence in politics.

Silence having minimal/no intensification effect (Organization 6)

While Organization 6 was criticized by some developers and security experts for keeping
silent when it discovered the breach, there were also some who commended the organization
for acting quickly. Although there was an information vacuum, it was short-lived.
Organization 6’s swift action might have helped to contain the situation by preventing
further breaches and overreactions from stakeholders and the press. By the time app
developers were informed, the fix was already underway. A relatively short period of silence
(three days) may also be more justifiable and thus more acceptable to stakeholders.

Location Organization/Leader Silence type Effect of silence

China Organization 4 Hiding Intensified, retrospectively (−)

Singapore Organization 5 Delaying Intensified, retrospectively (−)
India Organization 1 Avoiding Intensified information vacuum (−)
Vietnam Organization 2 Hiding Intensified information vacuum (−)
International Organization 3 Delaying Intensified information vacuum (−)
Canada Organization 7 Avoiding Intensified information vacuum (−)
Table VI. Myanmar Leader 1 Delaying Polarized perceptions (+/−)
Effects of silence International Organization 6 Delaying No effect (0)
RQ3a examined what led the organization to break the silence. Data presented two Strategic
scenarios: when situational factors forced the organizations to break the avoiding/hiding silence in crisis
silence; and when the breaking of delaying silence went as planned. The breaking of silence communication
for each case is summarized in Table VII.

Silence broken due to situational factors (Organizations 1, 2, 4 and 7)

In the four cases of avoiding/hiding silence, various situational factors prompted 171
the organization to issue a response against its will. Such factors include one or
more intensified threats (litigation/publicity/legitimization of activist’s claim) or a change
in external public characteristics (size/power/commitment), which are situational factors
suggested in the contingency theory (Pang et al., 2010). In India, Organization 1 was forced
to break its silence after the farmers’ protests became wider and more extreme, drawing
support from opposition parties and trade bodies. The protesters had grown in size,
commitment and power, while their demands were legitimized following the Supreme
Court’s ruling. For Vietnam, after investigations affirmed Formosa’s involvement
and legitimized the activists’ claims, protests spread exponentially, forcing Organization 2
to acknowledge the issue as the worst environmental crisis in Vietnam’s history.
In China, the crisis was uncovered and publicized by two journalists, garnering national
attention in social and mainstream media, resulting in a sudden, intensified publicity
threat that prompted Organization 4 to respond. For Organization 7, the investigation
confirmed its responsibility, thereby legitimizing the challenge and intensifying
the publicity threat, forcing Organization 7 to issue a long-awaited news release on
October 4, 2012.

Silence broken as planned (Leader 1, Organizations 3, 5 and 6)

In the four cases of delaying silence as part of a broader plan, it was observed that changes
in stakeholders’ salience, if any, were not significant enough and the threats to reputation
were not intensified enough to force the silence to be broken earlier than intended.
Additionally, preparatory work must be completed in the form of investigative work such
that sufficient information is obtained, and the organization/leader is able to form a primary
response. With Myanmar, criticisms of Leader 1 were aligned with those previously
received on their past track record of treating the Muslim community. Hence, although the
crisis severity escalated as hundreds of thousands of Muslims fled the country with
increasing media coverage, Leader 1 consistently maintained their stance on the issue. It can
then be inferred that the September 19 speech was the result of deliberate planning.
For Organization 3, the management used the duration of silence to gather information and
take preparatory actions that would satisfy its stakeholders and provide closure.
On January 23, 2017, a statement was issued regarding the cause of the fault and future
quality enhancement plans. The timing seemed well planned to allow for two months to

Location Organization/Leader Silence Breaking of silence

India Organization 1 Avoiding Forcefully broken by situational factors

Canada Organization 7 Avoiding Forcefully broken by situational factors
Vietnam Organization 2 Hiding Forcefully broken by situational factors
China Organization 4 Hiding Forcefully broken by situational factors
Myanmar Leader 1 Delaying Broken as planned
International Organization 3 Delaying Broken as planned
Singapore Organization 5 Delaying Broken as planned Table VII.
International Organization 6 Delaying Broken as planned Breaking of silence
CCIJ pass before Organization 3 announced its new smartphone model on March 29, 2017.
24,1 For Organization 5, while running the risk of an information leak by staff or patients, it
remained silent during the investigation. With the public unaware and the virus being
blood-borne instead of airborne, Organization 5 was able to determine at which point they
would be ready to break the silence. With Organization 6, no reputation threat was
intensified during the three-day silence, breaking it only to announce the corrective actions,
172 implying that the announcement was part of a planned protocol.
RQ3b examined how the organization broke the silence. Types of postures and responses
as suggested in the SCCT (Coombs, 2008) were used to analyze the statements issued to
breaking the silence, grouped by the same scenarios described in RQ3a.

Forced responses following avoiding/hiding silence (Organizations 1, 2, 4 and 7)

Each organization employed different response strategies when forced to break silence, and
all three postures – deny, diminish, deal – were observed. In India, Organization 1 adopted
the deal posture, but with weak commitment. Compensation was offered by its Chief
Minister in a promise to write off the farmers’ loans. Organization 1 also issued an
independent drought relief, albeit at a small fraction of the proposed amount. In Vietnam,
Organization 2 applied the scapegoat strategy in the deny posture to break silence, issuing a
statement to push the blame to Formosa and fining the company US$500m. For China,
Organization 4 adopted the diminishing posture to break silence, yet offered no apology.
Representatives offered the excuse that there were flaws in supervising the vaccine
distribution, while a top executive expressed bafflement that trafficking in vaccines could be
so widespread and continue for so long. To minimize the severity of the problem,
Organization 4 justified that expired vaccines rarely caused harmful biological reactions
and thus had minimal health risks. With Organization 7, the deal posture was adopted, with
the management expressing concern and deep regret for the illnesses caused, claiming full
responsibility in an apology to all affected.

Planned responses following delaying silence (Leader 1, Organizations 3, 5 and 6)

Keeping silent allowed time to plan and prepare an official primary response. All three
postures (deny, diminish, deal) were observed. In Myanmar, Leader 1 adopted diminish and
deal postures in their September 19 address, stating that allegations had to be accompanied
by evidence before action was taken (excuse). They also expressed concern, issuing
statements showing sympathy for all victims and the drive to understand the cause for
the refugee situation. As justification, Leader 1 stated that the nation was divided and
the responsibility to resolve the issue laid with every person in it. For Organization 3, the
management’s responses reflected the deal posture. The product recall, replacement and
trade-ups for the then-upcoming phones reflected compensation. Its advertisement and open
letter offered apology with regret, and when revealing the investigation findings, it
apologized again. In a move of ingratiation, its President of Mobile Communications
Business thanked stakeholders for their patience and support. For Organization 5, the
management adopted the deal posture post-silence. During its first media briefing on
October 6, 2015, the CEO issued an apology and expressed regret for causing grief to the
patients and families, committing to pay for the affected patients’ treatment (compensation)
and set up a conference to address concerns and offer victims psychological and emotional
support (concern). For Organization 6, its response took on the deny, diminish and deal
postures. In its e-mail to developers, Organization 6 attributed the hack to an intruder’s
attempt (scapegoat), informed that it had immediately taken the site down to fix the issue
(justification) and apologized for the inconvenience caused (regret).
The fourth research question examined how the organization’s image was affected
after the silence was broken. Data were collected to assess each organization/leader’s
social image, financial image, product image and recruitment image (Van Riel Strategic
and Fombrun, 2007) post-silence. Table VIII summarizes the effects of the organization’s silence in crisis
post-silence image. communication
Where avoiding/hiding silence is broken forcefully (Organizations 1, 2, 4 and 7)
In all four cases, organizational image was negatively affected after the breaking of silence.
For instance, with India, the country was left in shock as the media continued to cover the 173
farmers’ struggles and emphasized Organization 1’s inaction despite the court’s ruling,
signifying a damaged social image for Organization 1. In the Vietnam case, Organization 2’s
restriction on press coverage of the pollution crisis drew attention to the lack of press
freedom in the country and caused increasing unease over both pollution and food safety.
Even a year post-silence, anger is still brewing among Vietnamese fishermen for the
organization’s poor disaster handling, affecting their livelihoods in the repercussion.
Political Science Professor Tuong Vu remarked that the case showed its incompetency and
corruption, resulting in lasting damage on its social image.

Where delaying silence is broken as planned (Leader 1, Organizations 3, 5 and 6)

In all four cases, those involved were mostly able to preserve or restore their post-silence
image. For instance, with pre-order sales for its new phone models surpassing previous
phones, Organization 3 appeared to have restored consumer confidence in its products,
i.e. preserving its product image. Media reports following January 23’s press conference also
suggested that consumers and investors had moved on as the conglomerate continued to
perform well in the market, i.e. restoring its financial image.

Discussion
New typologies for strategic silence
Out of the ten possible organizational intentions listed in Table I, the study observed three in
our cases and proposed three corresponding typologies (in Table V ):
(1) avoiding silence is used when the organization/leader intends to avoid certain
stakeholder and/or issues at hand;
(2) hiding silence is used to hide relevant information from stakeholders; and
(3) delaying silence is employed to signal work-in-progress and buy time for a primary
response.
The findings show that when avoiding/hiding silence is used but broken forcefully, it
produces a negative effect on stakeholders’ perceptions of the organization both during the
information vacuum and post-silence. However, when delaying silence is used, it can be
tolerated by certain stakeholders during the silence itself. The right time to break delaying

Location Organization/Leader Silence Post-silence organizational image

India Organization 1 Avoiding Damaged (social)

Canada Organization 7 Avoiding Ruined (social, product, financial and recruitment)
Vietnam Organization 2 Hiding Damaged (social)
China Organization 4 Hiding Damaged (social)
Myanmar Leader 1 Delaying Retained local support (social) Table VIII.
International Organization 3 Delaying Recovered (product and financial) Effects of
Singapore Organization 5 Delaying Recovered (product) organizational
International Organization 6 Delaying Recovered (product and financial) image post-silence
CCIJ silence is when the organization has gathered enough information or is sufficiently prepared
24,1 for the intended crisis response strategy. If the organization manages to break the delaying
silence with an appropriate response strategy as planned, stakeholders are more likely to
maintain/regain confidence in the organization.

Delaying silence can be part of an effective crisis management strategy

174 The findings challenge the dominant view that in times of crisis, organizations should
always issue a response as quickly as possible, or “steal thunder” from the public or media.
Under certain circumstances, silence can be golden, if employed strategically and
implemented carefully. Among the eight cases, delaying silence has potential to work in the
organization/leader’s favor, by presenting five advantages:
(1) When used to signal work-in-progress, delaying silence may be more tolerable
toward stakeholders and could reduce intensification of the crisis.
(2) Together with constant monitoring of threats and changes to stakeholder salience,
delaying silence may be able to withstand the pressures of such situational factors.
(3) Intentionally employing delaying silence would put the organization in a proactive
position as they would determine the breaking of silence, thus giving them control
over the crisis.
(4) Delaying silence can also be used to provide the organization with additional time to
conduct further investigation before issuing a primary response.
(5) If implemented well, delaying silence has shown to have a possibility of image
recovery for the organization.
Delaying silence can thus prove positive if employed to signal activation and sustained long
enough for an appropriate primary response to be crafted and issued.

The advantages of issuing a first-response statement before delaying silence

Since delaying silence is used to signal work-in-progress, it is worth exploring whether a
first-response statement should be issued pre-silence, especially when the crisis cause is
unclear, as seen in the cases of Organizations 3, 5 and 6. Smith (2013) suggested that
strategic silence may work better with a statement of justification. This paper defines a
first-response statement as a disclaimer to signal work-in-progress before delaying silence,
without stating a definite stance. Coombs (2015b) argued that organizations can create
holding statements or templates. Templates are “prewritten messages that require only a
few blanks to be filled before they are released” (p. 97). These may lack details but they
provide some early information. Some of these early information include core messages that
have been written and approved before the crisis. These templates need to be clearly
distinguished from a primary response issued only after proper investigation to break
silence. Issuing a first-response statement immediately before adopting delaying silence can
present a number of benefits:
(1) It helps the organization avoid being criticized should they stay completely silent
before issuing a primary response, which might be interpreted as withholding
information, assuming guilt or expressing lack of sympathy, particularly when
crisis severity is high or might escalate. For Organization 5, one question to consider
is whether retrospective criticism could be avoided if it had offered a first-response
statement. The public were not informed during the investigation as alerting them to
a potentially life-threatening problem prematurely could have triggered panic, so the
prudence of Organization 5 in this case might be justified.
 (2) It frees up the risk of having to adopt a stance prematurely before the organization is Strategic
ready to commit to one. For Organization 3, the management had mistakenly silence in crisis
assured customers of the safety of the devices after the first recall and eventually communication
had to launch a second recall. An analyst suggested that Organization 3 should have
made a less conclusive first-response statement at the onset of the crisis to buy time
for the organization, while assuring stakeholders that it is attending to the situation.
(3) It helps the organization to focus on fixing the issue without any external 175
distractions (Smith, 2013).
(4) It gives allowance to gather accurate information for a proper, primary response.
There is a need to weigh the benefits of issuing a first-response statement to avoid
accusations of being non-transparent (Organization 5) against the risks of giving incomplete
and possibly inaccurate information (Organization 3). If the organization is confident that
the investigation can be done expeditiously, there may not be a need for a first-response
statement (Organization 6).

Practical guide to delaying silence

Incorporating the points discussed above, this study proposes a four-stage managerial
guide on when to adopt delaying silence, as well as how to plan, sustain and break delaying
silence (see Figure 1).
When to adopt delaying silence. Delaying silence can be used when the organization needs
time to investigate the crisis, especially when the cause is unclear; to fix an issue with a clear
cause without inciting panic; or to gather information or make arrangements for a primary
response. In such cases, delaying silence can be used as a supporting strategy to prepare for
a primary response.
Planning silence. Once the crisis hits, the organization should begin to formulate a
primary response strategy following Coombs’ (2008) SCCT framework. The local context
should be assessed, e.g. whether silence may be perceived by local stakeholders the same
way the organization intends. Finally, depending on how confident the organization is in
obtaining the necessary information swiftly, it might opt to issue a first-response statement
to signal work-in-progress.
Sustaining silence. During the silence, while working on investigating and fixing the issue
and preparing for the issuance of the primary response (and related logistics), the
organization needs to continuously monitor threats and stakeholder salience to detect any
intensification. It is key to have appropriate contingency responses planned in case there is a
need to prematurely break the silence.
Breaking silence. If all goes according to plan, the organization issues the primary response(s)
as intended once it has obtained sufficient information and made adequate preparation.

(Start of crisis)

Adopting Silence? Planning Silence Sustaining Silence Breaking Silence

• Time is needed to • Assess crisis situation • Obtain information • Issue primary

investigate the crisis • Assess predisposing • Prepare for primary response as planned
• Time is needed to fix factors response • Monitor stakeholder
the issue • Formulate primary • Monitor threats perception
• Information needed to response strategy • Monitor stakeholder Figure 1.
be gathered to prepare • Issue first-response salience “Guide to delaying
for primary response statement to signal • Prepare contingency silence” flowchart
delay responses
CCIJ It is also important to monitor stakeholders’ perceptions of the response to detect if the
24,1 organizational image – be it social, financial, product and/or recruitment image (Van Riel and
Fombrun, 2007) – has been negatively affected, and to come up with appropriate follow-up
image repair measures.

Limitations
176 There are certain limitations to the study. First, these findings may lack generalizability due
to the limited number of cases studied. Second, local sentiments may not be fully
represented in the English-language news examined as they may be written for a different
audience, e.g. the expatriate community. Finally, a number of cases (Leader 1, Organization 1)
were still ongoing at the time of writing, so the overall effectiveness of the strategy
employed might be compromised as future events unfold.
The cases selected involved both political and organizational crises. A larger set of cases
would help to determine if there are differences in the use of silence in these two crisis
contexts. It is envisaged that silence might be used more often or for different reasons
depending on it being a political or organizational context. Future research could examine a
wider selection of cases to complete the typology of strategic silence based on the five
communicative functions discussed, and investigate instances where strategic silence might
be effective as a primary or solo strategy itself. Empirical studies could also be conducted to
investigate the mediating power of delaying silence on the relationship between the primary
response strategy type and stakeholder perceptions.

Conclusion
Crisis management strives to merge theory with practice (Heath and Coombs, 2006).
However, crisis theory often trails behind practice (Coombs, 2015a), and the study of silence
as a crisis management strategy is a case in point. This paper has attempted to explore the
practice of strategic silence, “elevating it from discretional reaction to complex pro-action”
as Dimitrov (2015, p. 648) suggested, and aims to fill the theoretical gap by offering clearer
intention-based definitions of strategic silence and a practical guide on when and how
strategic silence can be used to manage crises. As Coombs (2008) and Pang (2012) noted,
theory must be carefully developed and rigorously tested over time. The propositions of this
paper remain to be tested in future work, and it is hoped that new avenues of research have
been identified through this investigation.

References
An, S. and Cheng, I. (2010), “Crisis communication research in public relations journals: tracking
research trends over thirty years”, in Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S.J. (Eds), Handbook of Crisis
Communication, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 65-90.
Augustine, N.R. (1995), “Managing the crisis you tried to prevent”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73
No. 6, pp. 147-158.
Benoit, W.L. (2015), Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: Image Repair Theory and Research, SUNY Press,
Albany, NY.
Benoit, W.L. and Pang, A. (2008), “Crisis communication and image repair discourse”, in Hansen-Horn, T.
and Neff, B. (Eds), Public Relations: From Theory to Practice, Pearson Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA,
pp. 244-261.
Brummett, B. (1980), “Towards a theory of silence as a political strategy”, Quarterly Journal of Speech,
Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 289-303.
Claeys, A.S. and Cauberghe, V. (2012), “Crisis response and crisis timing strategies, two sides of the
same coin”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 83-88.
Claeys, A.S. and Opgenhaffen, M. (2016), “Why practitioners do (not) apply crisis communication Strategic
theory in practice”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 28 Nos 5-6, pp. 232-247. silence in crisis
Coombs, W.T. (2008), “The development of the situational crisis communication theory”, Public communication
Relations: From Theory to Practice, Pearson Allyn & Bacon, pp. 262-277, Boston, MA.
Coombs, W.T. (2015a), “The value of communication during a crisis: insights from strategic
communication research”, Business Horizons, Vol. 58 No. 2, pp. 141-148.
Coombs, W.T. (2015b), Ongoing Crisis Communication, 4th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 177
Coombs, W.T. and Holladay, S. (2015), “CSR as crisis risk: expanding how we conceptualize the
relationship”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 144-162.
Dimitrov, R. (2015), “Silence and invisibility in public relations”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 41 No. 5,
pp. 636-651.
Donath, B. (1984), “Why you need a crisis PR plan”, Business Marketing, Vol. 69, September, p. 4.
Ferrin, D.L., Kim, P.H., Cooper, C.D. and Dirks, K.T. (2007), “Silence speaks volumes: the effectiveness of
reticence in comparison to apology and denial for responding to integrity-and competence-based
trust violations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 893-908.
Fujio, M. (2004), “Silence during intercultural communication: a case study”, Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 331-339.
Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967), The Discovery Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Inquiry, Aldin, Chicago, IL.
Hearit, K.M. (1994), “Apologies and public relations crises at Chrysler, Toshiba, and Volvo”, Public
Relations Review, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 113-125.
Heath, R.L. and Coombs, W.T. (2006), Today’s Public Relations: An Introduction, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hu, Y. and Pang, A. (2016), “Public relations practitioners’ perceptions of the use of crisis response
strategies in China”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. 333-335.
Hu, Y. and Pang, A. (2018), “The indigenization of crisis response strategies in the context of China”,
Chinese Journal of Communication, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 105-128.
Jaworski, A. (1992), The Power of Silence: Social and Pragmatic Perspectives, Vol. 1, Sage Publications,
Newbury Park, CA.
Jensen, J.V. (1973), “Communicative functions of silence”, ETC: A Review of General Semantics,
Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 249-257.
Johannesen, R.L. (1974), “The functions of silence: a plea for communication research”, Western Journal
of Communication, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 25-35.
Jugo, D. (2017), “Reactive crisis strategies application of the corporate sector in Croatia”, Journal of
Communication Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 201-214.
Lee, B.K. (2004), “Audience-oriented approach to crisis communication: a study of Hong Kong
consumers’ evaluation of an organizational crisis”, Communication Research, Vol. 31 No. 5,
pp. 600-618.
Maor, M., Gilad, S. and Bloom, P.B.N. (2012), “Organizational reputation, regulatory talk, and strategic
silence”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 581-608.
Pang, A. (2012), “Towards a crisis pre-emptive image management model”, Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 358-378.
Pang, A. (2013), “11. Dealing with external stakeholders during the crisis: managing the information
vacuum”, in DuBrin, A.J. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Crisis Leadership in Organizations,
Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA, pp. 209-229.
Pang, A., Jin, Y. and Cameron, G.T. (2010), “Strategic management of communication: insights from the
contingency theory of strategic conflict management”, in Heath, R.L. (Ed.), The Sage Handbook
of Public Relations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 17-34.
CCIJ Pang, A., Nasrath, B. and Chong, A.C.Y. (2014), “Negotiating crisis in the social media environment:
24,1 evolution of crises online, gaining credibility offline”, Corporate Communications:
An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 96-118.
Penuel, K.B., Statler, M. and Hagen, R. (Eds) (2013), Encyclopedia of Crisis Management, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Smith, R.D. (2013), Strategic Planning for Public Relations, Routledge, New York, NY.
178 Stake, R.E. (1998), “Case studies”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Strategies of Qualitative
Inquiry, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 86-109.
Swanson, D.J. (2012), “Answering to God, or to senator grassley?: How leading Christian health and
wealth ministries’ website content portrayed social order and financial accountability following
a federal investigation”, Journal of Media and Religion, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 61-77.
Van Riel, C.B. and Fombrun, C.J. (2007), Essentials of Corporate Communication: Implementing
Practices for Effective Reputation Management, Routledge, Oxon.
Wan, S., Koh, R., Ong, A. and Pang, A. (2015), “Parody social media accounts: influence and impact on
organizations during crisis”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 381-385.
Woon, E. and Pang, A. (2017), “Explicating the information vacuum: stages, intensifications, and
implications”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 329-353.
Xu, K. and Li, W. (2013), “An ethical stakeholder approach to crisis communication: a case study of
Foxconn’s 2010 employee suicide crisis”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 117 No. 2, pp. 371-386.
Ye, L. and Pang, A. (2011), “Understanding the Chinese approach to crisis management: cover-ups,
saving face, and toeing the upper-level line”, Journal of Marketing Channels, Vol. 18 No. 4,
pp. 247-278.
Yin, R.K. (1984), Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, Sage Publications,
Newbury Park, CA.

Corresponding author
Augustine Pang can be contacted at: augustine@smu.edu.sg

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

CSR paradox
The CSR paradox: when a social
responsibility campaign can
tarnish a brand
Elizabeth Johnson-Young 179
University of Mary Washington, Fredericksburg, Virginia, USA, and
Received 30 August 2018
Robert G. Magee Revised 7 December 2018
Accepted 8 December 2018
The Meek School of Journalism and New Media, University of Mississippi,
Oxford, Mississippi, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the corporate social responsibility (CSR) paradox, when a
social campaign hurts the sponsoring brand even while raising concern for the campaign issue.
Design/methodology/approach – A between-subjects experiment tested the effects of regulatory frames,
issue involvement and collective efficacy on brand attitude, attitude toward the campaign messages, and
concern for the issue.
Findings – A promotion-oriented frame (vs prevention-oriented frame) produced a more unfavorable brand
attitude among consumers who had low levels of collective efficacy, even though the promotion-oriented
frame generated strong concern for the issue itself. Attitudes toward the campaign messages remained
favorable, suggesting that the negative effect of message frames was directly specifically at the brand.
Originality/value – Using real-world campaign materials demonstrated that a firm’s CSR campaign efforts
can create important brand risks.
Keywords Brand attitude, Corporate social responsibility, Brand negativity, Regulatory framing
Paper type Research paper

Much is made of the benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR) campaigns for
connecting a brand with consumers. A CSR campaign can generate positive consumer
attitudes for the campaign issue and the campaign messages can be well received, but,
paradoxically, in some cases the campaign can also hurt the firm’s brand. This CSR paradox
can depend on the way a campaign’s messages are framed. Certain types of frames can
generate a positive attitude toward the campaign issue, while simultaneously producing a
negative attitude toward the sponsoring brand. This phenomenon is particularly likely if
consumers attribute a self-interested motive to the firm (Forehand and Grier, 2003).

The CSR paradox

While much research has supported a positive relationship between CSR campaigns and
consumer perception of the firm (Brønn and Vrioni, 2001; Pfau et al., 2008), researchers have
re-examined the benefits because of increased consumer skepticism, which appears to
be due, in part, to the prevalence of CSR campaigns (Brønn and Vrioni, 2001). Given the
ubiquity of so many campaigns, consumers legitimately might doubt a given firm’s motives
for supporting a social issue (Forehand and Grier, 2003). In fact, the more a consumer knows
about potential persuasion techniques, such as a CSR campaign, the greater the likelihood
that a consumer will attribute self-serving motives to a firm that appears to be using a
Corporate Communications: An
technique (Campbell and Kirmani, 2000; Magee, 2018). A CSR campaign might not benefit International Journal
brand attitudes as easily as some marketing managers might hope. Further, even Vol. 24 No. 1, 2019
pp. 179-196
a well-intentioned CSR campaign could hurt the brand. The CSR paradox arises when a © Emerald Publishing Limited
1356-3289
campaign successfully generates greater awareness of, or concern for, a social issue but DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-08-2018-0090
CCIJ produce negative consumer attitudes toward the sponsoring brand. Many consumers
24,1 believe that a firm expects some sort of goodwill for addressing a social issue and will
attribute a mixture of firm-oriented and altruistic motives to a campaign. However, if
consumers perceive that the primary motivation is the firm’s benefit, then they will have a
negative evaluation of the firm and even of the campaign itself (Gupta and Pirsch, 2006).
The backlash could arise on any number of dimensions that touch on the firm’s reputation.
180 These dimensions could include attitude toward the brand, attitudes toward the campaign
itself (Gupta and Pirsch, 2006), attributions of firm motives (Barone et al., 2000), consumer
loyalty and long-term purchase behavior (Gupta and Pirsch, 2006), a consumer’s brand
preference among alternative brands, including the ability for the target brand to command a
price premium (Brønn and Vrioni, 2001), among others. The present study addresses an
impact on consumers’ attitude toward the brand, but given the interrelationships among
dimensions of corporate reputation (Gotsi and Wilson, 2001), the paradox likely applies to
other aspects of corporate reputation under specific circumstances.

CSR and causes

CSR involves a firm’s perceived duty to meet or exceed norms for socially desirable
actions (Maignan and Ferrell, 2004), and CSR activities can shape a firm’s reputation with
a number of stakeholders over time. CSR comprises a number of initiatives that address
the firm’s socially responsible practices, and might involve product sourcing, equitable
pay, fair trade, environmental protection and so on. Likewise, a firm can partner with
another organization to address social issues such as human rights, infant mortality or
education. Thus, CSR activities generally include social actions on the part of a company
that improve or meet a need in society (Brønn and Vrioni, 2001; Godfrey and Hatch, 2007;
Sheikh and Beise-Zee, 2011; Taylor, 2013). Rooted in the idea that organizations have
obligations to both stakeholders and stockholders, CSR activities may serve as an
indicator of a company’s perceived obligation, or they can be a method to maintain or
improve a firm’s reputation with broad focus and activity (Godfrey and Hatch, 2007;
Sheikh and Beise-Zee, 2011; Taylor, 2013).
Cause-related marketing (CRM) has been identified as a marketing-related dimension of
CSR (Maignan and Ferrell, 2004; Nan and Heo, 2007; Peloza and Shang, 2011; Sheikh and
Beise-Zee, 2011). CRM activities “are characterized by an offer from the firm to contribute a
specified amount to a designated cause when customers engage in revenue-producing
exchanges […]” (Varadarajan and Menon, 1988, p. 60). While consumers might be a primary
target, CRM activities can also be designed to influence a number of stakeholders, such as
suppliers and employees (Gupta and Pirsch, 2006). A CRM program seeks to satisfy
to objectives, namely, to support a deserving cause and to enhance firm performance
(Gupta and Pirsch, 2006; Varadarajan and Menon, 1988). Although CRM has been defined
more broadly as the promotion of a firm’s CSR activities in marketing communications
(Brønn and Vrioni, 2001), most definitions focus on the transactional nature of CRM.
The “distinctive feature of CRM is the firm’s contribution to a designated cause being linked
to customers’ engaging in revenue-producing transactions with the firm” (Varadarajan and
Menon, 1988, p. 60). This type of program serves to support a worthy cause and improves
the firm’s reputation in the mind of consumers, both active supporters of the brand and
inactive consumers.

Motivating inactive consumers

A major challenge that firms face concerns developing an effective strategy for expanding
market share by energizing inactive consumers, those who have a low-level involvement
with a brand, whether through influencing these consumers’ purchase behavior or by
enhancing the firm’s brand more broadly. In trying to motivate inactive consumers,
though, firms must also not forget that some actions risk alienating core, or active, CSR paradox
consumers – people who are already involved in the brand through purchasing behaviors
or affective brand loyalty.
Likewise, a CSR campaign can serve to increase awareness and to motivate consumers to
become more involved in addressing a specific social issue, while simultaneously enhancing
the brand’s reputation and expanding market share (Brønn and Vrioni, 2001; Sen et al., 2006).
Essentially, many firms desire to increase their social responsibility as a way to influence 181
consumers’ purchasing behavior. However, when a firm takes part in this type of a campaign,
especially one that involves consumers’ core values, the firm risks generating a negative
attitude toward the brand (Romani et al., 2015).
Of course, the discussion thus far assumes that firms view a CSR campaign in
instrumental terms, as something whose primary value is a positive influence on
consumer attitudes toward the brand. It is quite possible, though, that a firm engages in a
CSR campaign for altruistic motives, even if doing so involves a negative impact on the
firm’s brand. However, given managers’ obligations to maximize shareholder equity, any
such campaign should be undertaken with a full appraisal of the risk as well as the reward
for the firm.
CSR campaigns must address the social issue in a way that is valued by active
consumers and also to convert inactive consumers to become supporters of both the social
issue and, hopefully, the firm. CSR campaigns can take many forms, from simply donating
money to charities to more active participation in social issues, such as executing a social
awareness campaign.
This type of CSR campaign involves several facets, then: the social issue, brand attitudes,
the perspective of consumers who are already active concerning the issue, and the
perspective of inactive consumers that the firm hopes to engage in both the issue and
the brand. When taking on such a large campaign, firms invest significant amounts of
resources and often seek to encourage inactive consumers to both care about the social issue
and the firm, while maintaining or boosting active consumers’ positive attitudes.

Dove campaign for real beauty

The connection between media images of a “thin ideal,” body satisfaction and eating
disorders is a major health problem, particularly for young women (Levine and Harrison,
2009; Nathanson and Botta, 2003; Park, 2005). This link has given rise to efforts, such as
Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty, to promote a healthy body image among women as a
means of promoting healthy behaviors and preventing disordered eating among young
women. In addition to improving young women’s self-esteem, Dove also has raised concern
in the general public about the issue and advocated solutions to counter the negative effects
that may result from these media images and the beauty industry.
Until 2010, Dove brands targeted women, and the Campaign for Real Beauty focuses on
young women, the brand’s core consumers. Importantly, though, Dove’s campaign is not
exclusively aimed at young women. Men, both young and old, can be encouraged to take an
active role in promoting healthy esteem among girls and young women. Therefore, the
campaign targets parents and peers, both male and female. Parents will have a personal
interest, particularly if they have daughters, but motivating young men, young women’s peers,
would be potentially more difficult as their connection to the issue of body image is not as direct.
The campaign “supports the Dove mission: to make more women feel beautiful every day
by widening stereotypical views of beauty” (Dove, 2008, Campaign for Real Beauty Mission).
The Dove brand is attached to all campaign materials that encourage self-esteem and parental
and peer involvement in enhancing the self-esteem of others. Through its website, videos, the
use of a self-esteem fund, and workshops, the campaign has educated young girls and women
about media messages and to help them build a more positive self-image.
CCIJ Dove campaign for real beauty as CSR
24,1 The Dove Campaign for Real Beauty is more appropriately classified as a CSR campaign
rather than a CRM program, given the corporate activities the campaign comprises.
Although Dove may at times use marketing messages to communicate the activities, the
campaign-related workshops and research, and direct deliverables measured outside of
revenue gains, indicate that the overall campaign is a form of CSR. The Campaign for
182 Real Beauty does not use product sales to raise funds for a partner organization or a cause,
and funding for the campaign is not tied to any purchase behavior. More specifically,
campaign messaging materials do not solicit or promote sales or seek to raise funds.
As described later, the campaign messages used in the present study are intended to be
shared socially to address the issue of body image.

Regulatory frames in CSR messages

Regulatory focus holds that a person or a message is guided by either a promotion focus
or a prevention focus (Aaker and Lee, 2001; Higgins, 1997; Zhao and Pechmann, 2006;
Rothman et al., 2008). Promotion-focused individuals are motivated to recognize possible
achievements, while prevention-focused people are motivated to avoid hazards. A person’s
regulatory focus also affects processing goals, particularly when presented
with ambiguous cues (Kirmani and Zhu, 2007). A person with a prevention focus
is more sensitive to cues of persuasive intent and is more likely to process an
advertisement defensively.
Regulatory focus has mainly been studied in terms of the individual person’s
regulatory focus as an individual difference variable, but marketing messages can be
crafted in terms of a promotion- or prevention-oriented frame, something that is under
a marketing manager’s control (Zhao and Pechmann, 2007). The regulatory frame of a
message should be dependent upon the desired behavioral outcome, as the message’s
regulatory frame is important in determining behavioral outcomes (Park et al., 2013;
Rothman et al., 2008), and individual variables may facilitate more effective frame choices.
To minimize the potential of negative brand attitudes, one must consider how
regulatory frames and individual differences can be used to create tailored messages
(Latimer et al., 2008; Rothman et al., 2008).
Among females generally, the issue of body image is chronically important; therefore,
either a promotion- or prevention-framed message that addresses the issue will be equally
effective in generating concern for the issue. For males generally, however, the issue of
women’s concern for their own body image is less salient. Nevertheless, a campaign
message might generate concern for the issue if the message frames the issue as one that
can be solved. In other words, the effectiveness of a message frame should be moderated by
the recipient’s sex. Specifically, messages that feature a promotion (vs prevention) frame will
generate greater concern for the issue among males, while the regulatory frames will be
equally effective among females. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1. CSR campaign messages’ regulatory frame will interact with participant sex to
predict concern for the issue.

CSR sweet spot

A firm can identify a “sweet spot” (Aaker, 2014) that is relevant to consumers and then tie
the brand to it to enhance the brand. A sweet spot can be related to a consumer’s identity or
lifestyle, or it can even be an element of a consumer’s sense of purpose or meaning in life.
Brand-building activities based on a sweet spot or shared interest, when done well, can
serve to strengthen connections with consumers.
 If the ideal sweet spot is related to core values or identity, the risk of a backlash is strong CSR paradox
if the campaign is not executed properly, particularly if it is perceived to threaten the value
that the campaign seeks to address. The issue of body image is important, and it can form a
sweet spot for many consumers, but because this issue is related to a young woman’s
identity, a firm risks criticism. Consumers generally reward a firm that they believe expends
an effort for consumers’ well-being, but if they believe the firm’s actions are motivated by an
intent to persuade, then any benefit to the firm is lost (Morales, 2005). 183
Consumers can have positive attitudes toward a firm’s CSR campaign when they
believe campaign is fueled by a profit motive instead of concern for the campaign issue
(De Vries et al., 2013). Consumers can make a profit-related attribution quickly because
firms are expected to seek a profit and the campaign serves that goal. When a firm
maintains that the campaign is motivated primarily by the firm’s concern for the issue,
consumers tend to be more skeptical, or they must reflect on and evaluate the claim before
they accept it. Consumers are also likely to doubt a firm’s sincerity when consumers
believe that the firm’s expenditures for promoting the CSR activity is large relative to the
campaign itself, and this tendency is exacerbated when the firm itself is reporting the
activity (Yoon et al., 2006).
Given that Dove sells products that are designed to improve a person’s appearance,
the campaign could create cynicism. Quite possibly, a CSR campaign runs the risk of
producing a negative brand attitude while raising concern for the social issue. Consumers
are likely to believe that a firm that sells beauty and hygiene products has a self-interested
profit motive for advancing consumers’ concern for personal appearance, which is closely
tied to body image. Some messages encourage consumers to talk to girls “before the
beauty industry does” (Onslaught, n.d.). Ironically, though, most consumers consider Dove
to be part of this “beauty industry,” and warning consumers about potential harmful effects
seems disingenuous, at best. Thus, consumers are likely to be somewhat cynical of a
firm’s expressed concern for girls’ and young women’s self-esteem. As a result, these
consumers might perceive a CSR campaign for a healthier body image to conflict with the
firm’s self-interested motive in selling beauty products (Forehand and Grier, 2003).
Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H2. CSR messages will produce an unfavorable attitude toward the brand compared
with a control condition.

Involvement with the CSR issue

Level of involvement refers to the extent to which a topic or brand has personal relevance to
an individual (Petty et al., 1983). For a CSR campaign, personal involvement and a sense of
connection with a campaign affect the effectiveness on an individual level (Aldoory, 2001;
Tindall and Vardeman-Winter, 2011). Consumers might have direct experience with a
campaign issue, or they might have indirect experience through relatives or friends.
In cases of low levels of involvement, however, consumers can become more involved
when they recognize the existence of an issue or are made aware the issue’s importance,
especially its importance in the lives of people with whom they have a strong
personal connection, such as family or friends. As consumers recognize the existence or
importance of a problem, they become more involved, or active, which then leads them to
seek and process relevant information (Major, 1993). Involved consumers tend to pay
closer attention to the campaign and any related marketing messages (Petty et al., 1983).
In short, they move from being inactive consumers to being active participants in a
CSR campaign.
Involvement is a two-edged sword. In cases of high levels of involvement, consumers
devote greater scrutiny to marketing messages, which means they are more likely to
CCIJ respond favorably to strong well-reasoned messages and unfavorably to weak messages
24,1 (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Petty et al., 1981). In other words, consumers can become more
critical of messages, and if they perceive a conflict between a firm’s CSR efforts and the
firm’s motive, they can have a negative brand attitude:
H3. Regulatory frame and personal involvement will interact in predicting participants’
attitude toward the brand.
184
Regulatory frame and collective efficacy
Collective efficacy, an extension of self-efficacy, has been defined as one’s belief that a group
or a community can achieve a particular goal (Bandura, 2000). While self-efficacy focuses
with one’s own perception of one’s competence and ability, collective efficacy focuses on
one’s perception of a group’s competence and ability (Parker, 1994). Consumers with a high
sense of general self-efficacy will indicate the ability to influence the outcome of events and
to achieve their goals, while low self-efficacy consumers indicate they are generally
incapable controlling a behavior or outcome (Bandura, 2006). Similarly, people who indicate
a high, vs low, sense of general collective efficacy tend to believe that a social group has the
control and ability to implement change. Collective efficacy can be operationalized in two
main ways: a group-level variable or an individual-level variable. As a group-level variable,
collective efficacy would measure a social group’s sense of collective efficacy; conversely,
as an individual-level variable, collective efficacy would measure an individual’s perception
of a group’s efficacy.
Perceived collective efficacy influences the confidence in a group’s efforts and the
group’s ability to achieve its goals (Bandura, 2000). For example, in the political arena,
the more confidence an individual places in a group’s ability to work together and
make a difference, the more active the individual will be in behaviors such as voting or
canvassing (Bandura, 2000). Like individual self-efficacy, a sense of collective efficacy
reflects a belief that one can change and feel in control of social aspects of his or
her life (Bandura, 2000). Importantly, though, collective efficacy involves an
individual’s belief that the individual can achieve a change by working with other
people ( Johnson-Young and Magee, 2014).
A promotion-framed message emphasizes the need to advocate a positive change, and a
prevention-framed message focuses on the danger associated with the beauty industry.
Consumers who have low levels of collective efficacy should have more favorable attitudes
toward a brand that focuses on prevention of a problem than one that focuses on working
together to promote a solution. This is because a promotion-oriented focus is incompatible
with their belief that people cannot work together to make a change in society. Therefore,
the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4. Regulatory frame and collective efficacy will interact in predicting participants’
attitude toward the brand.
Method
Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty seeks to encourage healthy behavior among young
women by promoting a healthy body image. Although some campaign materials address
parents and peers, both male and female, the campaign targets young women. Although
different body issues exist among young men, the ideals of thinness and beauty tend not to
be personally relevant to young men. Thus, young men are an inactive public for the Dove
Campaign for Real Beauty, but they, as young women’s peers, could be motivated to become
more engaged in the issue. Young women constitute a naturally active public for this issue,
while young men constitute an inactive public that potentially could become more involved
with the issue.
Participants CSR paradox
Following approval of a university institutional review board, undergraduate students
(n ¼ 307) were recruited from a departmental research pool and participated in exchange for
course credit. The ages of the participants ranged from 18 to 24 years, and 86 percent were
white. Female participants accounted for 64 percent of the sample.

Materials 185
Regulatory frame
Four videos that featured either a promotion frame or a prevention frame were taken from
Dove’s online campaign videos: Amy (n.d.), Onslaught (n.d.), Evolution (n.d.) and Under
Pressure (n.d.). The promotion-framed videos (“Amy” and “Onslaught”) issued an appeal
to the individual viewer to be proactive in addressing the problem. “Onslaught” urged
people to speak with young women “before the beauty industry does” (Onslaught, n.d.).
“Amy” depicted a boy who thinks a girl is beautiful, and the video encouraged individuals
to pass on the video to tell someone she is beautiful. In the call to action, the videos
underscored that the viewer was someone who could help make a change. The prevention-
framed videos (“Evolution” and “Under Pressure”) described how the problem had
developed and highlighted the urgent need to confront the problem. “Under Pressure”
described the social pressures that girls and young women feel and highlighted
a Dove self-esteem workshop designed to strengthen young women, while “Evolution”
was a time-lapse video that illustrated all the steps taken to make a model look
unrealistically beautiful. The videos focused on the dangers involved and the problem
to be prevented.
To determine if the videos’ frame was apparent to audiences, a pilot test of the videos
was conducted. Participants read a brief definition of promotion frames and prevention
frames, after which they viewed each of the videos and expressed whether each video
employed a promotion frame, a prevention frame, or neither. Participants correctly
identified the frame of each video (all pso0.001).
The factor of the messages’ regulatory frame (promotion vs prevention vs control) was
operationalized via the campaign videos. Multiple stimulus sampling, namely, using two
campaign videos to operationalize each frame condition, permits stronger conclusions
concerning any message effects because any idiosyncratic feature of a single video is ruled
out as a potential cause. In the control condition, participants completed the relevant
measures without viewing a video.

Collective efficacy
A participant’s sense that people can implement social change by working together
was assessed via a collective efficacy scale ( Johnson-Young and Magee, 2014).
The scale comprised six items, such as communities can create solutions to problems
together and The best way to deal with society’s problems is for communities
to come together, which were measured on a ten-point scale (M ¼ 7.96, SD ¼ 1.36;
Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.91).

Personal involvement
To measure personal involvement with the issue, participants were asked to indicate
whether they had personal experience with disordered eating and whether someone close
to them had experience with disordered eating. If a participant answered affirmatively to
either question (Yes ¼ 208, 68 percent; No ¼ 98, 32 percent), that individual was considered
to be personally involved with disordered eating.
CCIJ Dependent variables
24,1 Attitude toward the brand (Abrand) was measured were measured on a nine-point semantic
differential scale (M ¼ 3.88, SD ¼ 2.64; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.98) with 12 item pairs such as
beneficial/harmful, positive/negative and effective/ineffective (Bearden and Netemeyer, 1999).
To assess attitude toward the campaign video (Avideo), participants rated a video on
20 attributes such as interesting, entertaining, persuasive, engaging and beneficial (M ¼ 7.53,
186 SD ¼ 1.53; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.93). Three items were used to measure concern for the
campaign issue (M ¼ 8.89, SD ¼ 1.30) with How concerned are you or would you be about
media images of beauty affecting your daughter’s body image? How important do you feel
this campaign is for young girls? and If you have a daughter or were to have a daughter, how
important do you think it is to assist in fostering a positive body image? This scale yielded a
Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.77.

Procedure
The hypotheses were tested in a between-subjects factorial experiment with participant sex,
personal involvement with disordered eating (yes vs no), collective efficacy (a measured
variable) and the message’s regulatory frame (promotion vs prevention vs control) as factors
and attitude toward the issue (Aissue), attitude toward the brand (Abrand) and attitude toward
the video (Avideo), as dependent variables. Participants’ collective efficacy was assessed
before they were exposed to one of the four campaign videos so that the video would not
influence their responses to the collective efficacy measure. Following this, they completed
the dependent variable measures. Participants’ experience with disordered eating was
reported at the conclusion of the study, just before they completed demographic items, to
avoid contaminating the dependent variable measures. Following completion of the
questionnaires, they were thanked for their time and debriefed.

Results
Before proceeding to the hypothesis tests, personal involvement with disordered eating was
determined to be unrelated to brand attitudes and attitude toward the videos ( psW0.20).
As one would expect, personal involvement (Myes ¼ 8.91, SE ¼ 0.10; Mno ¼ 8.41, SE ¼ 0.14)
was related to one’s attitude toward the issue of body image, t(304) ¼ 2.95, p ¼ 0.003.
Importantly, this relationship was apparent in the control condition (Myes ¼ 8.69,
SE ¼ 0.10; Mno ¼ 7.92, SE ¼ 0.14), in which participants did not view a video, t(97) ¼ 2.34,
p ¼ 0.021. Thus, participants who had experience with disordered eating expressed greater
concern for the issue of body image.
Likewise, participants reported high levels of concern for the issue of body image
(Missue ¼ 8.75, SD ¼ 1.39) and favorable attitudes toward the campaign’s video messages
(Mvideo ¼ 7.53, SD ¼ 1.53). However, they also reported unfavorable attitudes toward the
campaign’s sponsor (Mbrand ¼ 3.89, SD ¼ 2.64). As will be described below, the larger
standard deviation for attitudes toward the Dove brand stems from the messages’ negative
impact compared with a control condition.
The hypotheses were tested in models that included as factors an individual’s sex, sense
of collective efficacy, personal involvement with disordered eating and the messages’
regulatory frame, along with their interaction terms.

Activating an inactive public

Of particular interest is the possibility that a campaign’s message frames might activate an
inactive public. Therefore, it was important to identify factors that could increase males’
concern for the issue. Thus, H1 predicted that regulatory frames would interact with
participant sex to predict concern for the issue. The model predicting concern for the issue of
body image was significant, F(23, 281) ¼ 5.98, p o0.001, Radj. ¼ 0.27 (Table I). Of note in this CSR paradox
test, the main effect for regulatory frame was non-significant ( p ¼ 0.12), while the main
effect of sex was significant, F(1) ¼ 44.24, p o0.001, with female participants reporting
greater levels of concern for the issue of body image than males (Mfemales ¼ 9.13; SE ¼ 0.11;
Mmales ¼ 8.05; SE ¼ 0.12).
Importantly, though, the interaction term of participant sex and message frame was
significant, F(2) ¼ 4.68, p ¼ 0.01. A post hoc probe (Tukey’s HSD) of the interaction revealed 187
that the message frame influenced males’ concern for the issue (Figure 1). Males’ concern for
the issue after viewing a prevention-framed message (M ¼ 7.80; SE ¼ 0.21) did not vary

Aissue Abrand Avideo

Variable F(DF) F(DF) F(DF)

Efficacy 9.92 (1)** 14.68 (1)*** 25.41 (1)***

Frame 2.15 (2) 466.09 (2)*** 0.01 (1)
Involvement 3.81 (1)**** 2.98 (1)**** 2.00 (1)
Sex 44.24 (1)*** 0.46 (1) 4.56 (1)*
E×F 1.91 (2) 4.54 (2)* 3.22 (1)****
E×I 3.02 (1)**** 0.01 (1) 3.53 (1)**** Table I.
E×S 6.15 (1)* 0.11 (1) 2.25 (1) Attitude toward the
F×I 1.28 (2) 0.61 (2) 0.18 (1) issue, attitude toward
F×S 4.68 (2)* 16.70 (2)*** 0.71 (1) the brand and attitude
I×S 4.22 (1)* 1.18 (1) 1.62 (1) toward the campaign
E×F×I 0.07 (2) 0.55 (2) 0.46 (1) video as a function of
E×F×S 1.40 (2) 1.04 (2) 3.09 (1)**** participants’ collective
efficacy, the videos’
E×I×S 0.97 (1) 0.11 (1) 0.42 (1)
regulatory frame,
F×I×S 0.71 (2) 0.01 (2) 0.19 (1) participants’
E×F×I×S 0.04 (2) 0.65 (2) 1.30 (1) involvement with
Notes: Fissue(23, 281) ¼ 5.98, p o0.001; Adj. R2 ¼ 0.27; Fbrand(23, 281) ¼ 70.57, p o0.001; Adj. R2 ¼ 0.84; the issue and
Fvideo(15, 190) ¼ 3.06, p o0.001; Adj. R2 ¼ 0.13. *p o0.05; **p o0.01; ***p o0.001; ****po 0.10 participant sex

Frame
9.5
Promotion
Prevention
Control

9.0
Issue Concern

8.5

8.0

Figure 1.
7.5 Concern for the issue
as a function
of participant
Male Female sex and videos’
regulatory frame
Sex
CCIJ significantly from the control condition (M ¼ 7.75; SE ¼ 0.22), but males who viewed a
24,1 promotion-framed message reported a significantly greater concern (M ¼ 8.60; SE ¼ 0.20).
Males’ concern after viewing a promotion-framed message did not differ significantly from
that of females in any of the three framing conditions (Mcontrol ¼ 9.05, SE ¼ 0.21; Mprevention
¼ 9.33, SE ¼ 0.16; Mpromotion ¼ 9.01, SE ¼ 0.19). Thus, while males in the control condition
(M ¼ 8.03, SE ¼ 0.12) expressed significantly less concern for the issue compared with
188 females (M ¼ 9.15; SE ¼ 0.09), a promotion-framed message increased males’ concern for
the issue to a level that was comparable to that of females. A prevention-framed message
did not significantly increase males’ level of concern for the issue. This result provided
support for H1.

Negative effects on the brand

Noteworthy was the effect of the campaign messages on Abrand. The full model was
significant, F(23, 281) ¼ 70.57, p o0.001, Radj. ¼ 0.84 (Table I). H2 predicted that the
messages’ regulatory frame would produce unfavorable brand attitudes compared with a
control condition. The main effect of message frame was significant, F(2) ¼ 466.10,
p o0.001, and Abrand was far lower for both the prevention-framed messages (M ¼ 2.51, SE
¼ 0.12) and the promotion-framed messages (M ¼ 2.38, SE ¼ 0.12) when compared with the
control condition (M ¼ 7.23, SE ¼ 0.13). Thus, the campaign messages produced a negative
attitude toward the Dove brand providing support for H2.
While the messages generated a negative effect on the brand, the messages’ frame did
not significantly ( p W0.20) predict participants’ attitudes toward the messages (Avideo)
themselves. Thus, the message frame effect was limited to Abrand and did not extend to
Avideo. This pattern contrasts with widespread research in which attitudes toward
advertising campaign messages are found to predict Abrand. While participants generally
held favorable attitudes toward the campaign videos, these attitudes were distinct from
attitudes toward the brand.
The interaction term of message frame and collective efficacy was significant,
F(2) ¼ 4.54, p ¼ 0.012, in predicting participants’ Abrand. Across mean levels of involvement,
for both males and females, the simple-simple slope of collective efficacy varied with
the message frame condition, βprevention ¼ −0.55, p o0.001; βpromotion ¼ −0.16, p ¼ 0.11;
βcontrol ¼ 0.03, p ¼ 0.80. That is, participants who reported greater levels of collective
efficacy had lower brand attitudes when they were exposed to a prevention-framed
message. This relationship is illustrated in Figure 2.
Further, the interaction term of message frame and sex was significant, F(2) ¼ 16.70,
p o0.001. A post hoc probe of the interaction (Table II) revealed that males who viewed the
prevention-framed message had more favorable brand attitudes than females who viewed
either a prevention- or promotion-framed message.
Attitudes toward the messages exhibited a somewhat different pattern. The full model
was significant, F(15, 190) ¼ 3.06, p o0.001, Radj. ¼ 0.13 (Table I). Participant sex exhibited a
main effect on Avideo, F(1) ¼ 4.56, p ¼ 0.03, with females reporting a more favorable attitude
toward the videos (Mfemales ¼ 7.68, SE ¼ 0.15; Mmales ¼ 7.19, SE ¼ 0.18). Thus, just as
females (vs males) reported greater concern for the issue of body image, they also reported
more favorable attitudes toward the video messages.

Effect of message frame and personal involvement on brand attitudes

H3 predicted that the messages’ regulatory frame and an individual’s personal involvement
would interact in predicting Abrand. The interaction term was marginally significant,
F(2) ¼ 2.39, p ¼ 0.09. However, planned contrasts revealed that among those who viewed the
prevention-framed message, individuals who had experience with disordered eating had
significantly lower brand attitudes (M ¼ 2.03, SE ¼ 0.13) than individuals who did not
 9 CSR paradox
8
7

Brand Attitude
6
5
4 189
3
2
1

–6 –5 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 2
Collective Efficacy
Figure 2.
Notes: Best-fitting regression lines across mean Brand attitude
levels of involvement. Solid line = control; dotted as a product of
regulatory frame and
line = promotion frame; dashed line = prevention collective efficacy
frame

Condition LSM

Control, Female A 7.76

Control, Male B 6.70
Prevention, Male C 3.00
Table II.
Promotion, Male C D 2.57 Interaction of message
Promotion, Female D 2.18 regulatory frame and
Prevention, Female D 2.03 participant sex
Note: Conditions not connected by the same letter are significantly different (Tukey’s HSD) on Abrand

(M ¼ 2.63, SE ¼ 0.18) have experience with disordered eating, t(293) ¼ 2.61, p ¼ 0.01.
This result provided support for H3.
By comparison, the interaction between regulatory frame and personal involvement was
not a significant predictor of Avideo or concern for the issue ( ps W0.20). Thus, the interaction
did not produce generally negative attitudes; the negative attitude was directed toward the
brand specifically.

Effect of message frame and collective efficacy on brand attitudes

Collective efficacy was a significant negative predictor of Abrand. The test of the simple slope of
collective efficacy revealed a significant and negative relationship, β ¼ −0.10, po0.001. Thus, a
greater sense of collective efficacy predicted a negative attitude toward the Dove brand.
However, H4 predicted that the messages’ regulatory frame and individuals’ collective
efficacy would interact in predicting Abrand. The interaction term was significant,
F(2) ¼ 8.87, p o0.001. A post hoc analysis of the interaction revealed that the simple-simple
slope of collective efficacy was significant in the prevention-frame condition, β ¼ −0.13,
p o0.001, but non-significant in the promotion-frame condition, β ¼ 0.04, pW0.20, and
control condition, β ¼ 0.03, p W0.20. Participants high in collective efficacy had more
negative brand attitudes when they viewed a prevention-framed message, but not when
they viewed a promotion-framed message, as depicted in Figure 2. This result provided
support for H4.
CCIJ By comparison, collective efficacy was a positive predictor of Avideo for both the
24,1 prevention- and promotion-framed videos. The interaction term was significant, F(1) ¼ 4.60,
p o0.001. In a post hoc probe (Figure 3), the simple-simple slope of collective efficacy, across
mean levels of involvement, was significant under the promotion frame, β ¼ 0.19, p ¼ 0.047,
but the coefficient’s magnitude was larger with the prevention frame, β ¼ 0.38, p o0.001.
Thus, among participants with high levels of collective efficacy, a prevention-framed video
190 generated positive attitudes toward the video, but negative attitudes toward the brand.

Discussion
CSR paradox. The experiment results illustrated the paradox of how a CSR campaign could
generate a positive attitude toward the campaign issue and campaign messages but a negative
attitude toward the campaign sponsor. One glaring result that marketing managers will want to
understand is the negative effect of the CSR campaign messages on brand attitude. As attitudes
toward the issue became more favorable, attitude toward Dove tended to decline. In short, the
campaign’s benefits for the issue came at a cost to the brand. Marketing managers should
understand that while they might be doing something positive for their community or even
society as a whole, this does not necessarily translate into positive feelings toward their brand.
With Dove’s campaign, the consumers indicated that even if they are concerned with the issue
of the campaign they also indicated a low opinion of Dove. In weighing the benefits and
disadvantages of taking an active role in some sort of social corporate responsibility, firms
should not automatically expect for their consumers to have a brand attitude.
The negative effects on attitudes toward the brand underline the need for continued and
long-term research on consumers. Marketing managers need to take the effort to measure
campaign effectiveness over time, not just at the start or during the bulk of the campaign
(Kim et al., 2008).
Just as brand attitudes should play a more central role in campaign evaluation, and,
consumer segmentation should be included in these measures. Personal involvement and
collective efficacy were both significant main effect variables in the present test. Personal
involvement with disordered eating, either due to first-hand experience or to knowledge of
someone with the disorder, led to more concern for the issue, but personal involvement also
generated a lower attitude toward Dove. Similarly to personal involvement, collective
efficacy significantly predicted a positive attitude toward the issue and a negative attitude

10
9
Attitude toward video

8
7
6
5
4
3
2

–6 –5 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 2
Figure 3.
Attitude toward the Collective Efficacy
video as a product of Notes: Best-fitting regression lines across mean levels
regulatory frame and
collective efficacy of involvement. Dotted line = promotion frame; dashed
line = prevention frame
toward Dove. Individuals who were higher in collective efficacy indicated greater concern CSR paradox
for the issue and a higher likelihood to discuss the issue. An opposite effect occurred
concerning their attitude toward Dove – individuals higher in collective efficacy indicated a
more negative brand attitude. Thus, personal involvement and collective efficacy
individually predicted these dependent variables.
The campaign messages’ regulatory frame also played an important role in influencing
consumer attitudes. The interaction between the videos’ regulatory frame and consumers’ 191
collective efficacy predicted consumers’ concern for the issue. In both the prevention condition
and the promotion condition, collective efficacy was a significant and positive predictor of
attitude toward the issues. A moderately stronger effect occurred in the prevention condition,
but both types of frames were significant predictors. Similarly, the two-way interaction was a
negative predictor of brand attitude. However, the relationship between the two independent
variables indicated that collective efficacy was only a significant predictor of attitude toward
Dove in the prevention condition, not in the promotion condition. Regulatory framing and
personal involvement interacted only in affecting attitudes toward Dove. Personal involvement
did not influence attitudes toward Dove in the promotion condition. However, for those
participants in the prevention condition, personal involvement did impact attitudes. Those who
lacked personal involvement indicated a higher opinion of Dove than those who did report
personal involvement with the issue. Personal involvement also appeared to moderate the
interactive effects of regulatory frame and collective efficacy on responses to the video.
The effects were still significant, but slightly weaker.
For Dove, the issue of body image has been a marketing sweet spot for its core
consumers – females. Among females high levels of collective efficacy predicted favorable
responses to the campaign issue and the messages, but they also produced negative brand
attitudes. That is, the messages’ regulatory frame did not produce a negative brand attitude.
Among males, though, regulatory frame and collective efficacy were both significant
predictors. Thus, it appears that the framing of the message interacted with a sense of
collective efficacy in producing a negative brand attitude among consumers who did not
have a close connection to the CSR issue.
Theoretical implications. Consumers with a personal experience with disordered eating
were significantly more likely to indicate concern for the issue than those with no personal
experience. Personal relevance continues to be an important variable in understanding attitudes
and actions of consumers. Similarly, those who indicated a low sense of collective efficacy were
significantly less likely to indicate a concern for the issue than those with a higher sense of
collective efficacy. If people indicate that a group of people or our society cannot work together
to make a difference, they appear to also not want to take part in the campaign.
Bandura (2000) noted that as the world becomes more intertwined and society more
interdependent, collective efficacy will become increasingly important. The results of the
current study indicate the viability of collective efficacy in predicting attitudes. Bandura’s
(2000) emphasis on the importance of collective efficacy is warranted. Even with other
measures taken into account, collective efficacy continued to be a strong predictor of
responses to the campaign across conditions.
Practical implications. The results also support idea of “inactive publics” (Hallahan, 2000),
who are stakeholders or consumers who have low levels of involvement and knowledge.
Although this type of consumer could easily be labeled as “passive,” but this term should be
reserved consumers who have no stake in an issue. “Inactive” consumers still have a stake in
the issues, and potentially could be “activated,” which separates them from market
segments that are chronically passive with reference to the CSR issue and the brand
(Hallahan, 2000). The challenge with “inactive” consumers is to increase their motivation
level, but to use message frames that do not produce a negative brand attitude.
CCIJ In the present study, even consumers who indicated no experience with the issue were
24,1 influenced by the campaign, depending on their level of collective efficacy and, particularly
in the male sample, depending on the message frame. This type of group, then, should not be
categorized with passive consumers who have no real possibility of becoming involved in a
specific CSR campaign. If marketing managers can capitalize on collective efficacy and
message framing, then even those targets with low involvement and knowledge may be
192 encouraged to care about a CSR issue and become involved.
It is also important to explore the effect of sex in terms of the theories utilized in this
research. As previously mentioned, sex significantly moderated the results. Females
generally indicated more concern than the male participants. Females were also
significantly affected by their level of collective efficacy and not by the framing of the
message. However, both collective efficacy and the framing of the message significantly
affected males. This seems to indicate a couple of important aspects of this study.
If Dove’s campaign is viewed as a feminine issue, then males may generally feel a low level
of involvement with the issue. However, males may be considered what Hallahan (2000)
categorizes and describes as an “inactive public.” Males should be considered a
stakeholder, as they may have someone close with them who deals with low self- and
body-esteem or eating disorders and they may have daughters that battle these issues.
They may perceive the issue as being less relevant to them, though, as the campaign is
geared toward helping young girls, so marketing managers must identify factors that
would motivate them.
Second, concern for the issue appears to grow along with the sense of collective efficacy
and the type of frame in the male sample. It appears that females already have a higher
sense of concern for the issue, but males do not. Instead of classifying them as passive
consumers, this research indicates that it is very possible to motivate them to show concern
for the issue through the types of campaign messages used and their sense of collective
efficacy. In other campaign research, these components will want to be considered for other
types of low involvement consumers. Marketing managers should also note these individual
differences and consider them when planning and executing campaigns.
Limitations and future research opportunities. Multiple stimulus sampling supports
confidence in the observed effects of the messages’ regulatory frames. By using two videos
to operationalize each type of regulatory frame, the experiment was able to rule out the
possibility that group differences might be due to idiosyncratic features of a particular
video. That is, attitudinal differences detected between the experiments’ conditions must be
attributed to a feature common between one pair of videos (i.e. a promotion frame) and not
shared by the other two videos (i.e. a prevention frame).
The most notable limitation was the sample population used. College-aged students’
responses to items might not fully reflect the concerns of older consumers, but had
older consumers been included in the sample the pattern of results likely would have
been stronger (Lynch, 1982; Mook, 1983). Thus, sample was quite appropriate for the
study’s goals of understanding the impact of campaign messages on brand attitudes
(Kardes, 1996).
This research also opens several avenues for future research. First, other issues or
consumer sweet spots, such as the environmental protection, merit scholarly attention.
Second, scholars should examine, beyond video messages, impacts of other types of
campaign material, such as face-to-face workshops, events, display ads and so on.
Brand negativity is a multidimensional construct (Fournier and Alvarez, 2013) and
its relationship in a nomological network should be explored more fully. For example,
skepticism can be measured as a trait, and it can also be cued as a situational
variable (Forehand and Grier, 2003), with different effects on brand attitude. A more
precise assessment of brand attitudes can focus on differing perceptions of brand’s CSR paradox
warmth and competence (Magee, 2012), and it is entirely likely that unfavorable brand
attitudes centered on the brand’s warmth more than on its competence. Emotional
components of brand negativity (Romani et al., 2012) were not explored in the present
study, but parsing cognitive and affective components of brand negativity should
yield greater insight into the CSR paradox. Further, an unfavorable attitude toward a
brand, or brand dislike, is distinct from antipathy toward a brand (Hegner et al., 2017; 193
Zarantonello et al., 2016).
Nevertheless, the CSR paradox that was observed in the present study offers a valuable
approach to the study of brand negativity. A CSR campaign can tarnish a firm’s brand, even
as the campaign messages can be well received and produce positive consumer attitudes for
the campaign issue. Thus, before embarking on a CSR campaign, marketing managers
should carefully consider any risks for potential brand negativity.

References
Aaker, D. (2014), Aaker on Branding: 20 Principles That Drive Success, Morgan James Publishing,
New York, NY.
Aaker, J.L. and Lee, A.Y. (2001), “ ‘I’ seek pleasures and ‘we’ avoid pains: the role of self-regulatory goals
in information processing and persuasion”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 33-49.
Aldoory, L. (2001), “Making health communications meaningful for women: factors that influence
involvement”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 163-185.
Amy (n.d.), Video, available at: http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/2007/dove-boy-calls-amy
(accessed January 16, 2019).
Bandura, A. (2000), “Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy”, Current Directions in
Psychological Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 75-78.
Bandura, A. (2006), “Toward a psychology of human agency”, Perspectives on Psychological Science,
Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 164-180.
Barone, M.J., Miyazaki, A.D. and Taylor, K.A. (2000), “The influence of cause-related marketing on
consumer choice: does one good turn deserve another?”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 248-262.
Bearden, W.O. and Netemeyer, R.G. (Eds) (1999), “Attitude toward the product/brand”, Handbook of
Marketing Scales: Multi-Item Measures for Marketing and Consumer Behavior Research, 2nd ed.,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 75-87.
Brønn, P.S. and Vrioni, A.B. (2001), “Corporate social responsibility and cause-related marketing: an
overview”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 207-222.
Campbell, M.C. and Kirmani, A. (2000), “Consumers’ use of persuasion knowledge: the effects of
accessibility and cognitive capacity on perceptions of an influence agent”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 69-83.
Dove, A. (2008), Campaign for Real Beauty Mission, available at: http://dove.msn.com/#/CFRB/arti_
CFRB.aspx[cp-documentid=7049726]/ (accessed November 8, 2009).
De Vries, G., Terwel, B.W., Ellemers, N. and Daamen, D.D.L. (2013), “Sustainability or profitability?
How communicated motives for environmental policy affect public perceptions of corporate
greenwashing”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 142-154.
Evolution (n.d.), Video, available at: www.dove.com/uk/stories/campaigns/evolution.html
(accessed January 16, 2019).
Forehand, M.R. and Grier, S. (2003), “When is honesty the best policy? The effect of stated company
intent on consumer skepticism”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 349-356.
Fournier, S. and Alvarez, C. (2013), “Relating badly to brands”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 23
No. 2, pp. 253-264.
CCIJ Godfrey, P.C. and Hatch, N.W. (2007), “Researching corporate social responsibility: an agenda for the
24,1 21st century”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 70, pp. 87-98.
Gotsi, M. and Wilson, A.M. (2001), “Corporate reputation: seeking a definition”, Corporate
Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 24-30.
Gupta, S. and Pirsch, J. (2006), “A taxonomy of cause-related marketing research: current findings and
future research directions”, Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 6,
194 pp. 25-43.
Hallahan, K. (2000), “Inactive publics: the forgotten publics in public relations”, Public Relations Review,
Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 499-515.
Hegner, S.M., Fetscherin, M. and van Delzen, M. (2017), “Determinants and outcomes of brand hate”,
Journal of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 13-25.
Higgins, E.T. (1997), “Beyond pleasure and pain”, American Psychologist, Vol. 52 No. 12, pp. 1280-1300.
Johnson-Young, E.A. and Magee, R.G. (2014), “Collective efficacy and the regulatory framing of
health messages: influences on concern for body image”, Journal of Health Communication,
Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 359-375.
Kardes, F.R. (1996), “In defense of experimental consumer psychology”, Journal of Consumer
Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 279-296.
Kim, J., Ni, L. and Sha, B. (2008), “Breaking down the stakeholder environment: explicating approaches
to the segmentation of publics for public relations research”, Journalism and Mass
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 85 No. 4, pp. 751-768.
Kirmani, A. and Zhu, R. (2007), “Vigilant against manipulation: the effect of regulatory focus on the use
of persuasion knowledge”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 688-701.
Latimer, A.E., Rivers, S.E., Rench, T.A., Katulak, N.A., Hicks, A., Hodorowski, J.P., Higgins, E.T. and
Salovey, P. (2008), “A field experiment testing the utility of regulatory fit messages for
promoting physical activity”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 44 No. 3,
pp. 826-832.
Levine, M.P. and Harrison, K. (2009), “Effects of media on eating disorders and body image”, in Bryant, J.
and Oliver, M.B. (Eds), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, 3rd ed., Routledge,
New York, NY, pp. 490-516.
Lynch, J.G. Jr (1982), “On the external validity of experiments in consumer research”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 225-239.
Magee, R.G. (2012), “Impression formation online: how web page colors can interact with physical
temperature”, Journal of Media Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 124-133.
Magee, R.G. (2018), “Environmental worldview beliefs and CSR advertising”, Social Responsibility
Journal, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-11-2017-0229.
Maignan, I. and Ferrell, O.C. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility: an integrative framework”, Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 3-19.
Major, A.M. (1993), “Environmental concern and situational communication theory: implications for
communicating with environmental publics”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 5 No. 4,
pp. 251-268.
Mook, D.G. (1983), “In defense of external invalidity”, American Psychologist, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 379-387.
Morales, A.C. (2005), “Giving firms an ‘E’ for effort: consumer responses to high-effort firms”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 806-812.
Nan, X. and Heo, K. (2007), “Consumer responses to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 63-74.
Nathanson, A.I. and Botta, R.A. (2003), “Shaping the effects of television on adolescents’ body image
disturbance: the role of parental mediation”, Communication Research, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 304-331.
Onslaught (n.d.), Video, available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEDTmJWWoOc&t=4s
(accessed January 16, 2019).
Park, C.W., Eisingerich, A.B. and Park, J.W. (2013), “Attachment-Aversion (AA) model of customer CSR paradox
brand relationships”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 229-248.
Park, S.Y. (2005), “The influence of presumed media influence on women’s desire to be thin”,
Communication Research, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 594-614.
Parker, L.E. (1994), “Working together: perceived self- and collective-efficacy at the workplace”,
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 43-59.
Peloza, J. and Shang, J. (2011), “How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for 195
stakeholders? A systematic review”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 39, No. 1
pp. 117-135.
Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1986), “The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion”, Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 123-205.
Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Goldman, R. (1981), “Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-
based persuasion”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 847-855.
Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Schumann, D. (1983), “Central and peripheral routes to advertising
effectiveness: the moderating role of involvement”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10 No. 3,
pp. 135-146.
Pfau, M., Haigh, M.M., Sims, J. and Wigley, S. (2008), “The influence of corporate social responsibility
campaigns on public opinion”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 145-154.
Romani, S., Grappi, S. and Dalli, D. (2012), “Emotions that drive consumers away from brands:
measuring negative emotions towards brands and their behavioral effects”, International
Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 55-67.
Romani, S., Grappi, S., Zarantonello, L. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2015), “The revenge of the consumer! How
brand moral violations lead to consumer anti-brand activism”, Journal of Brand Management,
Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 658-672.
Rothman, A.J., Wlaschin, J.T., Bartels, R.D., Latimer, A. and Salovey, P. (2008), “How persons and
situations regulate message framing effects: the study of health behavior”, in Elliot, A.J. (Ed.),
Handbook of Approach and Avoidance Motivation, Psychology Press, New York, NY,
pp. 475-486.
Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Korschun, D. (2006), “The role of corporate social responsibility in
strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: a field experiment”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 158-166.
Sheikh, S. and Beise-Zee, R. (2011), “Corporate social responsibility or cause-related marketing?
The role of cause specificity of CSR”, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 1,
pp. 27-39.
Taylor, M. (2013), “Corporate social responsibility campaigns: what do they tell us about organization-
public relations?”, in Rice, R.E. and Atkins, C.K. (Eds), Public Communication Campaigns, 4th ed.,
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 259-272.
Tindall, N.T. and Vardeman-Winter, J. (2011), “Complications in segmenting campaign publics: women
of color explain their problems, involvement, and constraints in reading heart disease
communication”, Howard Journal of Communications, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 280-301.
Under Pressure (n.d.), Video, available at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEH19c9YST4
(accessed January 16, 2019).
Varadarajan, P.R. and Menon, A. (1988), “Cause-related marketing: a coalignment of marketing
strategy and corporate philanthropy”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 58-74.
Yoon, Y., Gürhan-Canli, Z. and Schwarz, N. (2006), “The effect of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
activities on companies with bad reputations”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 377-390.
Zarantonello, L., Romani, S., Grappi, S. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2016), “Brand hate”, Journal of Product &
Brand Management, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 11-25.
CCIJ Zhao, G. and Pechmann, C. (2006), “Regulatory focus, feature positive effect, and message framing”,
24,1 Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33 p. 100.
Zhao, G. and Pechmann, C. (2007), “The impact of regulatory focus on adolescents’ response
to antismoking advertising campaigns”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 4,
pp. 671-687.

Further reading
196 Zhou, R. and Sengupta, J. (2006), “Motivational influences in consumer behavior: the role of regulatory
focus”, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33, pp. 532-535.

Corresponding author
Robert G. Magee can be contacted at: rgmagee@olemiss.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
 Volume 24 Number 1 2019

Corporate Communications
An International Journal

Number 1
1 Editorial advisory board
2 Credible corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication predicts legitimacy:
evidence from an experimental study
Irina Lock and Charlotte Schulz-Knappe
21 The buffering effects of CSR reputation in times of product-harm crisis
Yeonsoo Kim and Chang Wan Woo
44 The challenges of gamifying CSR communication
Kateryna Maltseva, Christian Fieseler and Hannah Trittin-Ulbrich
63 How different CSR dimensions impact organization-employee relationships:
the moderating role of CSR-culture fit
Zifei Fay Chen, Cheng Hong and Aurora Occa
79 Offshoring language-sensitive services: a case study
Anne Kari Bjørge and Sunniva Whittaker
96 Winning in the court of public opinion: exploring public relations–legal collaboration
during organizational crisis
Soojin Kim, Arunima Krishna and Kenneth D. Plowman
115 Identity matters: how the relevance of a crisis to organizational and stakeholder
identities influences reputation damage
Simone Mariconda, Alessandra Zamparini and Francesco Lurati
128 Share of voices in corporate social responsibility (CSR) news: a comparison of
sources used in press releases and news coverage
Lisa Tam
143 Leveraging interactive social media communication for organizational success:
an examination of Chinese net-roots third-sector organizations’ microblog use
Feifei Chen
162 When is silence golden? The use of strategic silence in crisis communication
Phuong D. Le, Hui Xun Teo, Augustine Pang, Yuling Li and Cai-Qin Goh
179 The CSR paradox: when a social responsibility campaign can tarnish a brand
Elizabeth Johnson-Young and Robert G. Magee

www.emeraldinsight.com/loi/ccij